...
首页> 外文期刊>Endoscopy: Journal for Clinical Use Biopsy and Technique >The roles of magnetic resonance and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (MRCP and ERCP) in the diagnosis of patients with suspected sclerosing cholangitis: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
【24h】

The roles of magnetic resonance and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (MRCP and ERCP) in the diagnosis of patients with suspected sclerosing cholangitis: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

机译:磁共振和内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(MRCP和ERCP)在疑似硬化性胆管炎患者诊断中的作用:成本效益分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The optimal approach for diagnosing sclerosing cholangitis remains unclear in the face of competing imaging technologies. We aimed to determine the most cost-effective strategy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A decision model compared three approaches in the work-up of patients with suspected sclerosing cholangitis; all included an initial test, with, if unsuccessful, performance of a second cholangiographic method. They were magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), termed "MRCP_ERCP", ERCP and MRCP ("ERCP_MRCP"), or ERCP and a repeat ERCP ("ERCP_ERCP"). The implications of true and false positive and negative results with regard to costs and procedural complications were considered, including that of a liver biopsy, if indicated as a result of a negative work-up in the face of persistent clinical suspicion. The unit of effectiveness adopted was that of a correct diagnosis. Probability assumptions were derived from published literature, while cost estimates were derived from time-motion microanalyses or a national database, and expressed in Canadian dollars at 2004 values. Sensitivity analyses, including clinically relevant threshold analyses, were carried out. RESULTS: The average cost-effectiveness ratios were Dollars 414 for MRCP_ERCP, Dollars 1101 for ERCP_MRCP and Dollars 1123 for ERCP_ERCP, per correct diagnosis. The ERCP_MRCP strategy was dominated (more expensive and less effective) by MRCP_ERCP, while ERCP_ERCP was more effective and more costly than MRCP_ERCP, at Dollars 289,292 per additional correct diagnosis. Sensitivity and threshold analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the model assumptions, a strategy of initial MRCP, followed, if negative, by ERCP is currently the most cost-effective approach to the work-up of patients with suspected sclerosing cholangitis.
机译:背景和研究目的:面对竞争性成像技术,诊断硬化性胆管炎的最佳方法仍不清楚。我们旨在确定最具成本效益的策略。患者和方法:决策模型比较了三种疑似硬化性胆管炎患者的检查方法。所有方法均包括初始测试,如果不成功,则执行第二次胆道造影方法。它们是磁共振胰胆管造影(MRCP)和内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP),称为“ MRCP_ERCP”,ERCP和MRCP(“ ERCP_MRCP”),或ERCP和重复ERCP(“ ERCP_ERCP”)。考虑到在费用和手术并发症方面真假的阳性和阴性结果的含义,包括肝活检的含义,如果是由于面对持续的临床怀疑而进行的阴性检查结果表明的话。采用的有效性单位是正确诊断的单位。概率假设是从已发表的文献中得出的,而成本估算是从时动微观分析或国家数据库中得出的,并以加元表示的2004年值。进行了敏感性分析,包括临床相关的阈值分析。结果:根据正确的诊断,平均成本效益比是MRCP_ERCP为414美元,ERCP_MRCP为1101美元和ERCP_ERCP为1123美元。 ERCP_MRCP策略由MRCP_ERCP主导(价格更高,效果更差),而ERCP_ERCP比MRCP_ERCP更有效,成本更高,每增加一次正确的诊断费用为289,292美元。敏感性和阈值分析证实了这些发现的稳健性。结论:基于模型假设,对疑似硬化性胆管炎患者进行检查的最经济有效的方法是采用最初的MRCP策略(如果否定),随后采用ERCP策略。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号