Urbach D R, Hansen P D, Khajanchee Y S, Swanstrom L L
Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Surgical Research, Legacy Systems, Portland, Ore, USA.
J Gastrointest Surg. 2001 Mar-Apr;5(2):192-205. doi: 10.1016/s1091-255x(01)80033-0.
In the absence of randomized controlled trials that directly compare all of the modern methods of managing achalasia, decision analysis may help determine the optimal treatment strategy. Four strategies for the initial management of achalasia were compared using the following decision model: (1) laparoscopic Heller myotomy and partial fundoplication; (2) pneumatic dilatation; (3) botulinum toxin injection; and (4) thoracoscopic Heller myotomy. Probabilities of clinical events and utilities of health states were estimated using review of the medical literature and patient interviews. A recursive decision tree (Markov model) was used to simulate all the important outcomes of each initial treatment option, allowing for complications, relapses over time, and transitions between strategies when appropriate. After 10 years, laparoscopic Heller myotomy with partial fundoplication was associated with the longest quality-adjusted survival (quality-adjusted life years [QALY] = 7.41). The difference between this strategy and either pneumatic dilatation or botulinum toxin injection was small. Thoracoscopic Heller myotomy was associated with the poorest quality-adjusted survival (QALY = 7.15). Pneumatic dilatation was the favored strategy when the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery at relieving dysphagia was less than 89.7%, the operative mortality risk was greater than 0.7%, or the probability of reflux after pneumatic dilatation was less than 19%. In a decision model, laparoscopic Heller myotomy with partial fundoplication is at least as effective as endoscopic approaches for managing achalasia symptoms. However, the differences are small enough that patient preferences and local expertise should be taken into consideration when tailoring a treatment plan for an individual patient.
在缺乏直接比较贲门失弛缓症所有现代治疗方法的随机对照试验的情况下,决策分析可能有助于确定最佳治疗策略。使用以下决策模型比较了贲门失弛缓症初始治疗的四种策略:(1)腹腔镜下Heller肌切开术加部分胃底折叠术;(2)气囊扩张术;(3)肉毒杆菌毒素注射;(4)胸腔镜下Heller肌切开术。通过查阅医学文献和患者访谈来估计临床事件的概率和健康状态的效用值。使用递归决策树(马尔可夫模型)来模拟每个初始治疗方案的所有重要结局,包括并发症、随时间的复发情况,以及在适当情况下不同策略之间的转换。10年后,腹腔镜下Heller肌切开术加部分胃底折叠术与最长的质量调整生存期相关(质量调整生命年[QALY]=7.41)。该策略与气囊扩张术或肉毒杆菌毒素注射之间的差异较小。胸腔镜下Heller肌切开术与最差的质量调整生存期相关(QALY=7.15)。当腹腔镜手术缓解吞咽困难的有效性低于89.7%、手术死亡率风险大于0.7%或气囊扩张术后反流的概率低于19%时,气囊扩张术是首选策略。在决策模型中,腹腔镜下Heller肌切开术加部分胃底折叠术在治疗贲门失弛缓症症状方面至少与内镜治疗方法同样有效。然而,差异足够小,在为个体患者制定治疗方案时应考虑患者的偏好和当地的专业知识。