Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 68, Issue 5 , Pages 920-936, November 2008

Cost-effectiveness analysis of management strategies for obscure GI bleeding

  • Lauren Gerson, MD, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Lauren B. Gerson, MD, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University Medical Center, A149, 300 Pasteur Dr, Stanford, CA 94305-5202.
  • ,
  • Ahmad Kamal, MD, MSc

Current affiliations: Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA

Received 18 July 2007; accepted 17 January 2008. published online 14 April 2008.

Stanford, California, USA

Background and Aims

Of patients who are seen with GI hemorrhage, approximately 5% will have a small-bowel source. Management of these patients entails considerable expense. We performed a decision analysis to explore the optimal management strategy for obscure GI hemorrhage.

Methods

We used a cost-effectiveness analysis to compare no therapy (reference arm) to 5 competing modalities for a 50-year-old patient with obscure overt bleeding: (1) push enteroscopy, (2) intraoperative enteroscopy, (3) angiography, (4) initial anterograde double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) followed by retrograde DBE if the patient had ongoing bleeding, and (5) small-bowel capsule endoscopy (CE) followed by DBE guided by the CE findings. The model included prevalence rates for small-bowel lesions, sensitivity for each intervention, and the probability of spontaneous bleeding cessation. We examined total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) over a 1-year time period.

Results

An initial DBE was the most cost-effective approach. The no-therapy arm cost $532 and was associated with 0.870 QALYs compared with $2407 and 0.956 QALYs for the DBE approach, which resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $20,833 per QALY gained. Compared to the DBE approach, an initial CE was more costly and less effective. The initial DBE arm resulted in an 86% bleeding cessation rate compared to 76% for the CE arm and 59% for the no-therapy arm. The model results were robust to a wide range of sensitivity analyses.

Limitations

The short time horizon of the model, because of the lack of long-term data about the natural history of rebleeding from small-intestinal lesions.

Conclusions

An initial DBE is a cost-effective approach for patients with obscure bleeding. However, capsule-directed DBE may be associated with better long-term outcomes because of the potential for fewer complications and decreased utilization of endoscopic resources.

Abbreviations: AVM, arteriovenous malformation, CE, capsule endoscopy, CPT, current procedural terminology code, DBE, double-balloon enteroscopy, ICER, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, QALY, quality-adjusted life year, QOL, quality of life, RBC, red blood cell

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Presented at American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Digestive Disease Week, May 21-24, 2006, Los Angeles, California (Gastrointest Endosc 2006;63:AB90).

PII: S0016-5107(08)00162-4

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2008.01.035

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 68, Issue 5 , Pages 920-936, November 2008