Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Gastroenterology ; 149(1): 130-8, 2015 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25790742

RESUMO

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic stents are placed for palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction. Although self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) remain patent longer than plastic stents, they are more expensive. We aimed to evaluate which type of stent (plastic, uncovered SEMS [uSEMS], or partially covered SEMS [pcSEMS]) is the most effective and we assessed costs. METHODS: We performed a multicenter randomized trial in 219 patients at 18 hospitals in The Netherlands from February 2008 through February 2013. Patients were assigned randomly for placement of a plastic stent (n = 73), uSEMS (n = 75), or pcSEMS (n = 71) during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Patients were followed up for up to 1 year. Researchers were not blinded to groups. The main study end points included functional stent time and costs. RESULTS: The mean functional stent times were 172 days for plastic stents, 288 days for uSEMS, and 299 days for pcSEMS (P < .005 for uSEMS and pcSEMS vs plastic). The initial placement of plastic stents (€1042 or $1106) cost significantly less than placement of SEMS (€1973 or $2094) (P = .001). However, the total cost per patient at the end of the follow-up period did not differ significantly between plastic stents (€7320 or $7770) and SEMS (€6932 or $7356) (P = .61). Furthermore, in patients with short survival times (≤3 mo) or metastatic disease, the total cost per patient did not differ between plastic stents and SEMS. No differences in costs were found between pcSEMS and uSEMS. CONCLUSIONS: Although placement of SEMS (uncovered or partially covered) for palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction initially is more expensive than placement of plastic stents, SEMS have longer functional time. The total costs after 1 year do not differ significantly with stent type. Dutch Clinical Trial Registration no: NTR1361.


Assuntos
Ductos Biliares Extra-Hepáticos/patologia , Colestase Extra-Hepática/cirurgia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Metais , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Stents , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Colestase Extra-Hepática/patologia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Surg Endosc ; 24(9): 2260-7, 2010 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20177920

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of mediastinal lymphadenopathy has been shown to be a valuable diagnostic tool in high-volume EUS centers (≥ 50 mediastinal EUS-FNA/endoscopist/year). Our goal was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA and its impact on clinical management and costs in low-volume EUS centers (<50 mediastinal EUS-FNA/endoscopist/year). METHODS: Consecutive patients referred to two Dutch endoscopy centers in the period 2002-2008 for EUS-FNA of mediastinal lymphadenopathy were reviewed. The gold standard for a cytological diagnosis was histological confirmation or clinical follow-up of more than 6 months with repeat imaging. The impact of EUS-FNA on clinical management was subdivided into a positive impact by providing (1) adequate cytology that influenced the decision to perform surgery or (2) a diagnosis of a benign inflammatory disorder, and a negative impact which was subdivided into (1) false-negative or inconclusive cytology or (2) an adequate cytological diagnosis that did not influence patient management. Costs of an alternative diagnostic work-up without EUS-FNA, as established by an expert panel, were compared to costs of the actual work-up. RESULTS: In total, 213 patients (71% male, median age= 61 years, range = 23-88 years) underwent EUS-FNA. Sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values were 89%, 100%, 80%, and 100%, respectively. EUS-FNA had a positive impact on clinical management in 84% of cases by either influencing the decision to perform surgery (49%) or excluding malignant lymphadenopathy (35%), and a negative impact in 7% of cases because of inadequate (3%) or false-negative (4%) cytology. In 9% of cases, EUS-FNA was performed without an established indication. Two nonfatal perforations occurred (0.9%). Total cost reduction was €100,593, with a mean cost reduction of €472 (SD = €607) per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Mediastinal EUS-FNA can be performed in low-volume EUS centers without compromising diagnostic accuracy. Moreover, EUS-FNA plays an important role in the management of patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy and reduces total diagnostic costs.


Assuntos
Biópsia por Agulha Fina/métodos , Endossonografia , Doenças Linfáticas/patologia , Doenças do Mediastino/patologia , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Biópsia por Agulha Fina/economia , Distribuição de Qui-Quadrado , Endossonografia/economia , Feminino , Humanos , Doenças Linfáticas/diagnóstico por imagem , Masculino , Doenças do Mediastino/diagnóstico por imagem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Países Baixos , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção/economia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA