AIM: To evaluate the most cost-effectiveness strategy for preventing variceal growth and bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and small esophageal varices. METHODS: A stochastic analysis based on decision trees was performed to compare the cost-effectiveness of beta-blockers therapy starting from a diagnosis of small varices (Strategy 1) with that of endoscopic surveillance followed by beta-blockers treatment when large varices are demonstrated (Strategy 2), for preventing variceal growth, bleeding and death in patients with cirrhosis and small esophageal varices. The basic nodes of the tree were gastrointestinal endoscopy, inpatient admission and treatment for bleeding, as required. All estimates were performed using a Monte Carlo microsimulation technique, consisting in simulating observations from known probability distributions depicted in the model. Eight-hundred-thousand simulations were performed to obtain the final estimates. All estimates were then subjected to Monte Carlo Probabilistic sensitivity analysis, to assess the impact of the variability of such estimates on the outcome distributions. RESULTS: The event rate (considered as progression of varices or bleeding or death) in Strategy 1 [24.09% (95%CI: 14.89%-33.29%)] was significantly lower than in Strategy 2 [60.00% (95%CI: 48.91%-71.08%)]. The mean cost (up to the first event) associated with Strategy 1 [823 £ (95%CI: 106 £-2036 £)] was not significantly different from that of Strategy 2 [799 £ (95%CI: 0 £-3498 £)]. The cost-effectiveness ratio with respect to this endpoint was equal to 50.26 £ (95%CI: -504.37 £-604.89 £) per event avoided over the four-year follow-up. When bleeding episodes/deaths in subjects whose varices had grown were included, the mean cost associated with Strategy 1 was 1028 £ (95%CI: 122 £-2581 £), while 1699 £ (95%CI: 171 £-4674 £) in Strategy 2. CONCLUSION: Beta-blocker therapy turn out to be more effective and less expensive than endoscopic surveillance for primary prophylaxis of bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and small varices.
AIM: To evaluate the most cost-effectiveness strategy for preventing variceal growth and bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and small esophageal varices. METHODS: A stochastic analysis based on decision trees was performed to compare the cost-effectiveness of beta-blockers therapy starting from a diagnosis of small varices (Strategy 1) with that of endoscopic surveillance followed by beta-blockers treatment when large varices are demonstrated (Strategy 2), for preventing variceal growth, bleeding and death in patients with cirrhosis and small esophageal varices. The basic nodes of the tree were gastrointestinal endoscopy, inpatient admission and treatment for bleeding, as required. All estimates were performed using a Monte Carlo microsimulation technique, consisting in simulating observations from known probability distributions depicted in the model. Eight-hundred-thousand simulations were performed to obtain the final estimates. All estimates were then subjected to Monte Carlo Probabilistic sensitivity analysis, to assess the impact of the variability of such estimates on the outcome distributions. RESULTS: The event rate (considered as progression of varices or bleeding or death) in Strategy 1 [24.09% (95%CI: 14.89%-33.29%)] was significantly lower than in Strategy 2 [60.00% (95%CI: 48.91%-71.08%)]. The mean cost (up to the first event) associated with Strategy 1 [823 £ (95%CI: 106 £-2036 £)] was not significantly different from that of Strategy 2 [799 £ (95%CI: 0 £-3498 £)]. The cost-effectiveness ratio with respect to this endpoint was equal to 50.26 £ (95%CI: -504.37 £-604.89 £) per event avoided over the four-year follow-up. When bleeding episodes/deaths in subjects whose varices had grown were included, the mean cost associated with Strategy 1 was 1028 £ (95%CI: 122 £-2581 £), while 1699 £ (95%CI: 171 £-4674 £) in Strategy 2. CONCLUSION: Beta-blocker therapy turn out to be more effective and less expensive than endoscopic surveillance for primary prophylaxis of bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and small varices.
Authors: Miguel R Arguedas; Gustavo R Heudebert; Mohamad A Eloubeidi; Gary A Abrams; Michael B Fallon Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Annalisa Berzigotti; Rosa Gilabert; Juan G Abraldes; Carlos Nicolau; Concepción Bru; Jaime Bosch; Juan C García-Pagan Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: C Merkel; M Zoli; S Siringo; H van Buuren; D Magalotti; P Angeli; D Sacerdoti; L Bolondi; A Gatta Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Daniel W Gunda; Semvua B Kilonzo; Zakhia Mamballah; Paulina M Manyiri; David C Majinge; Hyasinta Jaka; Benson R Kidenya; Humphrey D Mazigo Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2019-11-29 Impact factor: 3.067