» Articles » PMID: 36118645

Cost-effective Analysis of Preliminary Single-operator Cholangioscopy for Management of Difficult Biliary Stones

Overview
Journal Endosc Int Open
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2022 Sep 19
PMID 36118645
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Single-operator peroral cholangioscopy (SOC) is a therapeutic modality for difficult biliary stone disease. Given its high success rate and increasing availability, analysis of the economic impact of early SOC utilization is critical for clinical decision-making. Our aim is to compare the cost-effectiveness of different first and second-line endoscopic modalities for difficult-to-treat choledocholithiasis. A decision-tree model with a 1-year time horizon and a hypothetical cohort of 200 patients was used to analyze the cost-effectiveness of SOC for first, second and third-line intervention in presumed difficult biliary stones. We adopted the perspective of a Canadian tertiary hospital, omitting recurrence rates associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Effectiveness estimates were obtained from updated meta-analyses. One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed to assess how changes in key parameters affected model conclusions. First- and second-line SOC achieved comparable clinical efficacy from 96.3 % to 97. % stone clearance. The least expensive strategy is third-line SOC (SOC-3: $800,936). Performing SOC during the second ERCP was marginally more expensive (SOC-2: $ 816,584) but 9 % more effective. The strategy of first-line SOC incurred the highest hospital expenditures (SOC-1: $ 851,457) but decreased total procedures performed by 16.9 % when compared with SOC-2. Sensitivity analysis was robust in showing SOC-2 as the most optimal approach. Second-line SOC was superior to first and third-line SOC for treatment of difficult biliary stones. When based on meta-analysis of non-heterogeneous trials, SOC-2 is more cost-effective and cost-efficient. Our study warrants a larger pragmatic effectiveness trial.

Citing Articles

Feasibility, safety and efficacy of endoscopic single-operator cholangioscopy: a retrospective single-center study.

Buringer K, Schempf U, Fusco S, Wichmann D, Stuker D, Gotz M Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2024; 17:17562848241288111.

PMID: 39431174 PMC: 11487541. DOI: 10.1177/17562848241288111.


Endoscopic Management of Difficult Biliary Stones: An Evergreen Issue.

Manti M, Shah J, Papaefthymiou A, Facciorusso A, Ramai D, Tziatzios G Medicina (Kaunas). 2024; 60(2).

PMID: 38399627 PMC: 10890215. DOI: 10.3390/medicina60020340.

References
1.
Brewer Gutierrez O, Bekkali N, Raijman I, Sturgess R, Sejpal D, Aridi H . Efficacy and Safety of Digital Single-Operator Cholangioscopy for Difficult Biliary Stones. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017; 16(6):918-926.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.10.017. View

2.
Doshi B, Yasuda I, Ryozawa S, Lee G . Current endoscopic strategies for managing large bile duct stones. Dig Endosc. 2018; 30 Suppl 1:59-66. DOI: 10.1111/den.13019. View

3.
Yasuda I, Itoi T . Recent advances in endoscopic management of difficult bile duct stones. Dig Endosc. 2013; 25(4):376-85. DOI: 10.1111/den.12118. View

4.
Chang W, Chu C, Wang T, Chen M, Lin C . Outcome of simple use of mechanical lithotripsy of difficult common bile duct stones. World J Gastroenterol. 2005; 11(4):593-6. PMC: 4250818. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v11.i4.593. View

5.
Polsky D, Glick H . Costing and cost analysis in randomized controlled trials: caveat emptor. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009; 27(3):179-88. PMC: 2971527. DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200927030-00001. View