The burden of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Patients with Barrett's esophagus are recommended to undergo regular surveillance with upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, an invasive procedure that may cause anxiety, pain, and discomfort. We assessed to what extent patients perceived this procedure as burdensome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 192 patients with Barrett's esophagus were asked to fill out questionnaires at 1 week and immediately before endoscopy, and at 1 week and 1 month afterwards. Four variables were assessed: (i) pain and discomfort experienced during endoscopy; (ii) symptoms; (iii) psychological burden, i. e., anxiety, depression and distress levels (Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale, Impact of Event Scale); and (iv) perceived risk of developing adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: At least one questionnaire was returned by 180 patients (94 %), 151 completed all four (79 %). Of all patients, only 14 % experienced the endoscopy as painful. However, 59 % reported it to be burdensome. Apart from an increase in throat ache (47 % after endoscopy versus 12 % before), the procedure did not cause physical symptoms. Patients' anxiety, depression, and distress levels were significantly increased in the week before endoscopy compared with the week after. Patients perceiving their risk of developing adenocarcinoma as high reported higher levels of psychological distress and that the procedure was a greater burden. CONCLUSIONS: Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is burdensome for many patients with Barrett's esophagus and causes moderate distress. Perception of a high risk of adenocarcinoma may increase distress and the burden experienced from the procedure. The benefits of endoscopic surveillance for patients with Barrett's esophagus should be weighed against its drawbacks, including the short-term burden for patients.

Cost study of metal stent placement vs single-dose brachytherapy in the palliative treatment of oesophageal cancer.

Self-expanding metal stent placement and single-dose brachytherapy are commonly used for the palliation of oesophageal obstruction due to inoperable oesophagogastric cancer. We randomised 209 patients to the placement of an Ultraflex stent (n=108) or single-dose brachytherapy (12 Gy, n=101). Cost comparisons included comprehensive data of hospital costs, diagnostic interventions and extramural care. We acquired detailed information on health care consumption from a case record form and from monthly home visits by a specialised nurse. The initial costs of stent placement were higher than the costs of brachytherapy (1500 euro vs 570 euro; P<0.001). Total medical costs were, however, similar (stent 11 195 euro vs brachytherapy 10 078 euro, P>0.20). Total hospital stay during follow-up was 11.5 days after stent placement vs 12.4 days after brachytherapy, which was responsible for the high intramural costs in both treatment groups (stent 6512 euro vs brachytherapy 7982 euro, P>0.20). Costs for medical procedures during follow-up were higher after stent placement (stent 249 euro vs brachytherapy 168 euro, P=0.002), while the costs of extramural care were similar (1278 euro vs 1046 euro, P>0.20). In conclusion, there are only small differences between the total medical costs of both palliative treatment modalities, despite the fact that the initial costs of stent placement are much higher than those of brachytherapy. Therefore, cost considerations should not play an important role in decision making on the appropriate palliative treatment strategy for patients with malignant dysphagia.