Literature DB >> 23512599

Cost-effectiveness analysis of 3-D computerized tomography colonography versus optical colonoscopy for imaging symptomatic gastroenterology patients.

Manuel Gomes1, Robert W Aldridge, Peter Wylie, James Bell, Owen Epstein.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: When symptomatic gastroenterology patients have an indication for colonic imaging, clinicians have a choice between optical colonoscopy (OC) and computerized tomography colonography with three-dimensional reconstruction (3-D CTC). 3-D CTC provides a minimally invasive and rapid evaluation of the entire colon, and it can be an efficient modality for diagnosing symptoms. It allows for a more targeted use of OC, which is associated with a higher risk of major adverse events and higher procedural costs. A case can be made for 3-D CTC as a primary test for colonic imaging followed if necessary by targeted therapeutic OC; however, the relative long-term costs and benefits of introducing 3-D CTC as a first-line investigation are unknown. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of 3-D CTC versus OC for colonic imaging of symptomatic gastroenterology patients in the UK NHS.
METHODS: We used a Markov model to follow a cohort of 100,000 symptomatic gastroenterology patients, aged 50 years or older, and estimate the expected lifetime outcomes, life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs (£, 2010-2011) associated with 3-D CTC and OC. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the base-case cost-effectiveness results to variation in input parameters and methodological assumptions.
RESULTS: 3D-CTC provided a similar number of LYs (7.737 vs 7.739) and QALYs (7.013 vs 7.018) per individual compared with OC, and it was associated with substantially lower mean costs per patient (£467 vs £583), leading to a positive incremental net benefit. After accounting for the overall uncertainty, the probability of 3-D CTC being cost effective was around 60 %, at typical willingness-to-pay values of £20,000-£30,000 per QALY gained.
CONCLUSION: 3-D CTC is a cost-saving and cost-effective option for colonic imaging of symptomatic gastroenterology patients compared with OC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23512599     DOI: 10.1007/s40258-013-0019-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy        ISSN: 1175-5652            Impact factor:   2.561


  4 in total

Review 1.  Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer Using CT Colonography.

Authors:  Manoj Kumar; Brooks D Cash
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-03

2.  Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Antonieta Medina-Lara; Bogdan Grigore; Ruth Lewis; Jaime Peters; Sarah Price; Paolo Landa; Sophie Robinson; Richard Neal; William Hamilton; Anne E Spencer
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 4.014

3.  How we can measure quality in colonoscopy?

Authors:  Leonidas A Bourikas; Zacharias P Tsiamoulos; Adam Haycock; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Brian P Saunders
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-10-16

Review 4.  National Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Saudi Arabia with strength of recommendations and quality of evidence.

Authors:  Nasser Alsanea; Majid A Almadi; Alaa S Abduljabbar; Samar Alhomoud; Taghreed A Alshaban; Abdullah Alsuhaibani; Ahmad Alzahrani; Faisal Batwa; Abdul-Hameed Hassan; Denise Hibbert; Randa Nooh; Mohammed Alothman; Bram Rochwerg; Waleed Alhazzani; Rebecca L Morgan
Journal:  Ann Saudi Med       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.526

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.