Inadomi John M, Somsouk Ma, Madanick Ryan D, Thomas Jennifer P, Shaheen Nicholas J
Division of Gastroenterology, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California 94110, USA.
Gastroenterology. 2009 Jun;136(7):2101-2114.e1-6. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.02.062. Epub 2009 Mar 6.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Recommendations for patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) include endoscopic surveillance with esophagectomy for early-stage cancer, although new technologies to ablate dysplasia and metaplasia are available. This study compares the cost utility of ablation with that of endoscopic surveillance strategies.
A decision analysis model was created to examine a population of patients with BE (mean age 50), with separate analyses for patients with no dysplasia, low-grade dysplasia (LGD), or high-grade dysplasia (HGD). Strategies compared were no endoscopic surveillance; endoscopic surveillance with ablation for incident dysplasia; immediate ablation followed by endoscopic surveillance in all patients or limited to patients in whom metaplasia persisted; and esophagectomy. Ablation modalities modeled included radiofrequency, argon plasma coagulation, multipolar electrocoagulation, and photodynamic therapy.
Endoscopic ablation for patients with HGD could increase life expectancy by 3 quality-adjusted years at an incremental cost of <$6,000 compared with no intervention. Patients with LGD or no dysplasia can also be optimally managed with ablation, but continued surveillance after eradication of metaplasia is expensive. If ablation permanently eradicates >or=28% of LGD or 40% of nondysplastic metaplasia, ablation would be preferred to surveillance.
Endoscopic ablation could be the preferred strategy for managing patients with BE with HGD. Ablation might also be preferred in subjects with LGD or no dysplasia, but the cost effectiveness depends on the long-term effectiveness of ablation and whether surveillance endoscopy can be discontinued after successful ablation. As further postablation data become available, the optimal management strategy will be clarified.
巴雷特食管(BE)患者的治疗建议包括对早期癌症进行内镜监测并实施食管切除术,尽管已有用于消融发育异常和化生的新技术。本研究比较了消融术与内镜监测策略的成本效益。
建立了一个决策分析模型,以研究BE患者群体(平均年龄50岁),对无发育异常、低级别发育异常(LGD)或高级别发育异常(HGD)的患者进行单独分析。比较的策略包括:不进行内镜监测;对新发发育异常进行内镜监测并消融;对所有患者立即进行消融,随后进行内镜监测,或仅限于化生持续存在的患者;以及食管切除术。模拟的消融方式包括射频、氩离子凝固术、多极电凝术和光动力疗法。
与不干预相比,HGD患者的内镜消融可使预期寿命延长3个质量调整生命年,增量成本<6000美元。LGD或无发育异常的患者也可通过消融得到最佳治疗,但化生根除后的持续监测成本高昂。如果消融能永久根除≥28%的LGD或40%的无发育异常化生,则消融优于监测。
内镜消融可能是治疗HGD的BE患者的首选策略。对于LGD或无发育异常的患者,消融也可能是首选,但成本效益取决于消融的长期有效性以及成功消融后是否可以停止监测内镜检查。随着更多消融后数据的获得,最佳治疗策略将得以明确。