Literature DB >> 11693323

Where do ERCP, endoscopic ultrasound, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, and intraoperative cholangiography fit in the management of acute biliary pancreatitis? A decision analysis model.

M R Arguedas1, A W Dupont, C M Wilcox.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The role of ERCP in acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) is controversial. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) are modalities for bile duct visualization that could lower costs and prevent ERCP-related complications. We analyzed costs and examined the cost-effectiveness of these modalities to define their role in ABP.
METHODS: A decision analysis model of ABP was constructed. The strategies evaluated were 1) ERCP, 2) MRCP followed by ERCP if positive for common bile duct stones (CBDS) or if biliary sepsis ensued, 3) EUS followed by ERCP if positive or if biliary sepsis ensued, and 4) observation with intraoperative cholangiography at the time of cholecystectomy with ERCP only if biliary sepsis ensued. We compared costs and performed cost-effectiveness analysis between strategies at probabilities of CBDS ranging from 0% to 100%. The outcome measures were total costs and costs per ABP death prevented.
RESULTS: At probabilities of CBDS < 15%, observation with intraoperative cholangiography is the least expensive strategy, whereas EUS and ERCP are the least expensive strategies at probabilities of 15-58% and >58%, respectively. In terms of cost-effectiveness, at probabilities of CBDS of 7-45%, EUS is the most cost-effective alternative, and at a probability of >45% ERCP is the most cost-effective option.
CONCLUSIONS: Total costs and cost-effectiveness ratios of these strategies in patients with ABP are highly dependent on the probability of CBDS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11693323     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.04244.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  15 in total

Review 1.  Endoscopic ultrasonography: imaging and beyond.

Authors:  T Rösch
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Selective use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in clinical practice may miss choledocholithiasis in gallstone pancreatitis.

Authors:  Sanket Srinivasa; Tarik Sammour; Bernard McEntee; Nicola Davis; Andrew G Hill
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 3.  Utility of endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatitis: a review.

Authors:  Maged K Rizk; Henning Gerke
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  [Endosonography of the gastrointestinal tract].

Authors:  M Moehler; P R Galle; R Kiesslich
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  Dynamic liver test patterns do not predict bile duct stones.

Authors:  Chung Yao Yu; Nitzan Roth; Niraj Jani; Jaehoon Cho; Jacques Van Dam; Rick Selby; James Buxbaum
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Short- versus long-sequence MRI cholangiography for the preoperative imaging of the common bile duct in patients with cholecystolithiasis.

Authors:  A Shamiyeh; E Lindner; J Danis; K Schwarzenlander; W Wayand
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-05-26       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Suspected common bile duct stones: reduction of unnecessary ERCP by pre-procedural imaging and timing of ERCP.

Authors:  Christina J Sperna Weiland; Evelien C Verschoor; Alexander C Poen; Xavier J M N Smeets; Niels G Venneman; Abha Bhalla; Ben J M Witteman; Hester C Timmerhuis; Devica S Umans; Jeanin E van Hooft; Marco J Bruno; P Fockens; Robert C Verdonk; Joost P H Drenth; Erwin J M van Geenen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 3.453

8.  Mild acute biliary pancreatitis vs cholelithiasis: are there differences in the rate of choledocholithiasis?

Authors:  Rosa Bertolín-Bernades; Luis Sabater-Ortí; Julio Calvete-Chornet; Bruno Camps-Vilata; Norberto Cassinello-Fernández; Miguel Oviedo-Bravo; Purificación Ivorra-García Monco; Raúl Cánovas-de Lucas; Salvador Lledó-Matoses
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 9.  Gallstone pancreatitis: when is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography truly necessary?

Authors:  Matthias Kraft; Markus M Lerch
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2003-04

10.  Scoring System for the Management of Acute Gallstone Pancreatitis: Cost Analysis of a Prospective Study.

Authors:  Jake G Prigoff; Gary W Swain; Celia M Divino
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.