Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Loma Linda University Health, Loma Linda, California; Gastroenterology Division, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Endoscopic Innovation, Research and Training, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Gastroenterology Division, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 Jan;20(1):216-226.e42. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.08.050. Epub 2021 Sep 2.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common adverse event after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and is responsible for substantial morbidity and health care expenditures of at least $200 million. Therapies for PEP prevention include pancreatic stent placement (PSP), rectal indomethacin, sublingual nitrates, and aggressive lactated Ringer's hydration. Our objective was to determine which PEP prophylactic strategies are cost effective.
We developed 2 separate decision trees to evaluate PEP prophylactic strategies. The first, in high-risk patients, compared rectal indomethacin, PSP, PSP with indomethacin, sublingual nitrates, aggressive hydration with lactated Ringer's, and no prophylaxis. The second, in average-risk patients, compared rectal indomethacin, sublingual nitrates, aggressive hydration, and no prophylaxis. We used incidence rates, transition probabilities, and costs from publications and public data sources. Outcome measures were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
Compared with no prophylaxis, all strategies were cost effective at a WTP of $100,000 in preventing PEP in high-risk patients. When directly compared with each other, rectal indomethacin was the cost-effective strategy in high-risk patients ($31,589/QALYs). In average-risk patients, indomethacin and sublingual nitrates were cost effective at a WTP of $100,000/QALYs compared with no prophylaxis. When directly compared with each other, rectal indomethacin was the cost-effective strategy ($53,016/QALYs).
Rectal indomethacin was the cost-effective strategy for preventing PEP in both average-risk and high-risk patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. All strategies were cost effective when compared with no prophylaxis in high-risk patients, whereas all strategies except for aggressive hydration with lactated Ringer's were cost effective in average-risk patients. Further studies are needed to improve the utilization of PEP prevention strategies.
内镜逆行胰胆管造影术后胰腺炎(PEP)是内镜逆行胰胆管造影术后最常见的不良事件,导致发病率和医疗保健支出显著增加,至少为 2 亿美元。PEP 的预防治疗包括胰管支架置入术(PSP)、直肠吲哚美辛、舌下硝酸盐和积极的乳酸林格氏液水化。我们的目的是确定哪些 PEP 预防策略具有成本效益。
我们分别建立了 2 个决策树来评估 PEP 预防策略。第一个是在高危患者中,比较直肠吲哚美辛、PSP、PSP 联合吲哚美辛、舌下硝酸盐、积极的乳酸林格氏液水化和无预防措施。第二个是在中危患者中,比较直肠吲哚美辛、舌下硝酸盐、积极水化和无预防措施。我们使用了来自出版物和公共数据源的发生率、转移概率和成本。结果以增量成本效益比(ICER)表示,支付意愿(WTP)阈值为 10 万美元/质量调整生命年(QALY)。
与无预防措施相比,在 WTP 为 10 万美元时,所有策略在预防高危患者 PEP 方面均具有成本效益。当直接相互比较时,直肠吲哚美辛是高危患者的成本效益策略(31589 美元/QALY)。在中危患者中,与无预防措施相比,吲哚美辛和舌下硝酸盐在 WTP 为 10 万美元/QALY 时具有成本效益。当直接相互比较时,直肠吲哚美辛是成本效益策略(53016 美元/QALY)。
直肠吲哚美辛是内镜逆行胰胆管造影术治疗的中危和高危患者预防 PEP 的成本效益策略。在高危患者中,与无预防措施相比,所有策略均具有成本效益,而在中危患者中,除积极的乳酸林格氏液水化外,所有策略均具有成本效益。需要进一步研究以提高 PEP 预防策略的利用率。