Literature DB >> 15223684

Cost-effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasonography, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients suspected of pancreaticobiliary disease.

A P Ainsworth1, S R Rafaelsen, P A Wamberg, T Pless, J Durup, M B Mortensen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is not known whether initial endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is more cost effective than endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).
METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis of EUS, MRCP and ERCP was performed on 163 patients. The effectiveness of an investigation was defined as the percentage of patients with no need for further evaluation after the investigation in question had been performed. Costs were assumed from the budget-holder's point of view.
RESULTS: MRCP, EUS and ERCP had a total accuracy of 0.91, 0.93 and 0.92, respectively. Eighty-four (52%) patients needed endoscopic therapy in combination with ERCP, giving an effectiveness of MRCP, EUS, and ERCP of 0.44, 0.45 and 0.92, respectively. The cost-effectiveness of MRCP, EUS, and ERCP was 6622, 7353 and 4246 Danish Kroner (DKK) per fully investigated and treated patient (1 DKK=0.14 EUR).
CONCLUSION: Within a patient population with a probability of therapeutic ERCP in 50% of the patients, ERCP was the most cost-effective strategy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15223684     DOI: 10.1080/00365520410004442

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0036-5521            Impact factor:   2.423


  4 in total

1.  Impact of magnetic resonance cholangiography in managing liver-transplanted patients: preliminary results of a clinical decision-making study.

Authors:  L Cereser; R Girometti; G Como; C Molinari; P Toniutto; D Bitetto; C Zuiani; M Bazzocchi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-07-09       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  MRCP is not a cost-effective strategy in the management of silent common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Irene Epelboym; Megan Winner; John D Allendorf
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Management of Suspected Choledocholithiasis: A Decision Analysis for Choosing the Optimal Imaging Modality.

Authors:  Amnon Sonnenberg; Brintha K Enestvedt; Gennadiy Bakis
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2015-09-23       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Is preoperative MRCP necessary for patients with gallstones? An analysis of the factors related to missed diagnosis of choledocholithiasis by preoperative ultrasound.

Authors:  Yan Qiu; Zhengpeng Yang; Zhituo Li; Weihui Zhang; Dongbo Xue
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-11-14       Impact factor: 3.067

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.