Yeoh K G, Zimmerman M J, Cunningham J T, Cotton P B
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Gastrointest Endosc. 1999 Apr;49(4 Pt 1):466-71. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(99)70044-1.
For palliation of patients with malignant obstructive jaundice, expansile metal stents provide longer patency than plastic stents but are more expensive. The optimal cost-effective strategy has not been established. Our aim was to compare the relative costs of 3 strategies: (1) plastic stent, with exchange on occlusion; (2) metal stent initially, with coaxial plastic stent insertion in the event of occlusion; or (3) plastic stent initially, with metal stent exchange in the event of occlusion.
A decision analysis model was created using DATA 2.6 software to assess the relative costs of the three strategies. Values for variables including the probabilities of reintervention and patient survival were obtained from published data. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursements of hospital charges, and the model was evaluated from the perspective of a third-party payer. One-way and two-way sensitivity analysis of the variables was performed over a wide range.
The outcome is highly sensitive to the ratio of metal stent cost relative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography cost (cost ratio M:ERCP) and to the length of survival of the patient. The most economical strategies were (2), (3) and (1) for M:ERCP cost ratios of <0.5, 0.5 to 0.7, and >0.7, respectively.
The choice of stent should be guided by the relative local costs of ERCP and metal stents and by the prognosis of the patient. At current metal stent costs and Medicare reimbursement rates, initial placement of a plastic stent, followed by metal stent placement at first occlusion in longer survivors, is an economical option. If metal stent cost is less than half of ERCP cost, then initial insertion of a metal stent would be most economical. Use of plastic stents is preferable for patients surviving less than 4 months, whereas metal stents are more economical for patients with longer survival.
对于恶性梗阻性黄疸患者的姑息治疗,可扩张金属支架的通畅时间比塑料支架长,但成本更高。尚未确立最佳的性价比策略。我们的目的是比较三种策略的相对成本:(1)塑料支架,闭塞时更换;(2)初始放置金属支架,闭塞时同轴插入塑料支架;或(3)初始放置塑料支架,闭塞时更换为金属支架。
使用DATA 2.6软件创建决策分析模型,以评估这三种策略的相对成本。包括再次干预概率和患者生存率等变量的值取自已发表的数据。成本基于医疗保险对医院收费的报销情况,该模型从第三方支付者的角度进行评估。对变量进行了广泛范围的单向和双向敏感性分析。
结果对金属支架成本与内镜逆行胰胆管造影术成本的比率(成本比M:ERCP)以及患者的生存时长高度敏感。对于M:ERCP成本比分别<0.5、0.5至0.7和>0.7的情况,最经济策略依次为(2)、(3)和(1)。
支架的选择应根据ERCP和金属支架的相对当地成本以及患者的预后情况来指导。按照当前金属支架成本和医疗保险报销率,初始放置塑料支架,对于生存时间较长的患者在首次闭塞时更换为金属支架,是一种经济的选择。如果金属支架成本低于ERCP成本的一半,那么初始插入金属支架将是最经济的。对于生存期少于4个月的患者,使用塑料支架更可取,而对于生存期较长的患者,金属支架更经济。