Burden and Cost of Gastrointestinal, Liver, and Pancreatic Diseases in the United States: Update 2021.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gastrointestinal diseases account for considerable health care use and expenditures. We estimated the annual burden, costs, and research funding associated with gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreatic diseases in the United States. METHODS: We generated estimates using data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey; National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey; Nationwide Emergency Department Sample; National Inpatient Sample; Kids' Inpatient Database; Nationwide Readmissions Database; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; National Vital Statistics System; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research; MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters data; MarketScan Medicare Supplemental data; United Network for Organ Sharing registry; Medical Expenditure Panel Survey; and National Institutes of Health (NIH). RESULTS: Gastrointestinal health care expenditures totaled $119.6 billion in 2018. Annually, there were more than 36.8 million ambulatory visits for gastrointestinal symptoms and 43.4 million ambulatory visits with a primary gastrointestinal diagnosis. Hospitalizations for a principal gastrointestinal diagnosis accounted for more than 3.8 million admissions, with 403,699 readmissions. A total of 22.2 million gastrointestinal endoscopies were performed, and 284,844 new gastrointestinal cancers were diagnosed. Gastrointestinal diseases and cancers caused 255,407 deaths. The NIH supported $3.1 billion (7.5% of the NIH budget) for gastrointestinal research in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrointestinal diseases are responsible for millions of health care encounters and hundreds of thousands of deaths that annually costs billions of dollars in the United States. To reduce the high burden of gastrointestinal diseases, focused clinical and public health efforts, supported by additional research funding, are warranted.

Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis.

The mainstay of management of acute cholecystitis has been surgical, with percutaneous gallbladder drainage in patients deemed high risk for surgical intervention. Endoscopic management of acute cholecytitis with transpapillary and transmural drainage of the gall bladder is emerging as a viable alternative in high-risk surgical patients. In this article, we discuss the background, current status, technical challenges and strategies to overcome them, adverse events, and outcomes of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for management of acute cholecystitis.

Over-the-scope clips are cost-effective in recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding.

Background: A recent prospective randomised controlled trial ('STING') showed superiority of over-the-scope clips compared to standard treatment in recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding. Cost-effectiveness studies on haemostasis with over-the-scope clips have not been reported so far. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the higher efficacy of the over-the-scope clips treatment outweighs the higher costs of the device compared to standard clips. Methods: For the analysis, the study population of the STING trial was used. Costs for the hospital stay in total as well as treatment-related costs were obtained. The average cost-effectiveness ratio, representing the mean costs per designated outcome, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, expressing the additional costs of a new treatment strategy per difference in outcome were calculated. The designated outcome was defined as successful haemostasis without rebleeding within seven days, which was the primary endpoint of the STING trial. Average cost-effectiveness ratio and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated for total costs of the hospital stay as well as the haemostasis treatment alone. The cost-effectiveness analysis is taken from the perspective of the care provider.Results: Total costs and treatment-related costs per patient were 13,007.07 € in the standard group vs 12,808.56 € in the over-the-scope clip group (p = 0.812) and 2084.98 € vs 1984.71 € respectively (p = 0.663). The difference was not statistically significant. Total costs per successful haemostasis (average cost-effectiveness ratio) were 30,677.05 € vs 15,104.43 € and 4917.41 € vs 2340.46 € for the haemostasis treatment. The additional costs per successful haemostasis with over-the-scope clip treatment (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) is -468.18 € for the whole treatment and -236.49€ for the haemostasis treatment. Conclusions: Over-the-scope clip treatment is cost-effective in recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding.

Transnasal Endoscopy in Unsedated Children With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Using Virtual Reality Video Goggles.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Evaluation and treatment of children with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) requires serial endoscopic, visual, and histologic assessment by sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE) was reported to be successful in a pilot study of children. We evaluated video goggle and virtual reality-based unsedated TNE in children with EoE, collecting data on rates of completion, adverse events, and adequacy of visual and histologic findings. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 190 children and young adults (age, 3-22 y) who underwent video goggle or virtual reality-based unsedated TNE from January 2015 through February 2018. We analyzed data on patient demographics, procedure completion, endoscope type, adverse events, visual and histologic findings, estimated costs, and duration in the facility. Esophageal biopsies from the first 173 subjects who underwent TNE were compared with those from previous EGD evaluations. RESULTS: During 300 attempts, 294 TNEs were performed (98% rate of success). Fifty-four patients (age, 6-18 y) underwent multiple TNEs for dietary or medical management of EoE. There were no significant adverse events. Visual and histologic findings were adequate for assessment of EoE. TNE reduced costs by 53.4% compared with EGD (TNE $4393.00 vs EGD $9444.33). TNE was used increasingly from 2015 through 2017, comprising 31.8% of endoscopies performed for EoE. The total time spent in the clinic (front desk check-in to check-out) in 2018 was 71 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective study of 190 children and young adults (age, 3-22 y) who underwent video goggle or virtual reality-based unsedated TNE, TNE was safe and effective and reduced costs of EoE monitoring. Advantages of TNE include reduced risk and cost associated with anesthesia as well as decreased in-office time, which is of particular relevance for patients with EoE, who require serial EGDs.

An Endoscopic Transluminal Approach, Compared With Minimally Invasive Surgery, Reduces Complications and Costs for Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Infected necrotizing pancreatitis is a highly morbid disease with poor outcomes. Intervention strategies have progressed from open necrosectomy to minimally invasive approaches. We compared outcomes of minimally invasive surgery vs endoscopic approaches for patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis. METHODS: We performed a single-center, randomized trial of 66 patients with confirmed or suspected infected necrotizing pancreatitis who required intervention from May 12, 2014, through March 24, 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that received minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement, depending on location of collection, n = 32) or an endoscopic step-up approach (transluminal drainage with or without necrosectomy, n = 34). The primary endpoint was a composite of major complications (new-onset multiple organ failure, new-onset systemic dysfunction, enteral or pancreatic-cutaneous fistula, bleeding and perforation of a visceral organ) or death during 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: The primary endpoint occurred in 11.8% of patients who received the endoscopic procedure and 40.6% of patients who received the minimally invasive surgery (risk ratio 0.29; 95% confidence interval 0.11-0.80; P = .007). Although there was no significant difference in mortality (endoscopy 8.8% vs surgery 6.3%; P = .999), none of the patients assigned to the endoscopic approach developed enteral or pancreatic-cutaneous fistulae compared with 28.1% of the patients who underwent surgery (P = .001). The mean number of major complications per patient was significantly higher in the surgery group (0.69 ± 1.03) compared with the endoscopy group (0.15 ± 0.44) (P = .007). The physical health scores for quality of life at 3 months was better with the endoscopic approach (P = .039) and mean total cost was lower ($75,830) compared with $117,492 for surgery (P = .039). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial of 66 patients, an endoscopic transluminal approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis, compared with minimally invasive surgery, significantly reduced major complications, lowered costs, and increased quality of life. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT02084537.

Comparison between Endoscopic Treatment and Surgical Drainage of the Pancreatic Duct in Chronic Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of recurrent chronic obstructive pancreatitis is pancreatic duct decompression with endoscopic drainage (endoscopic pancreatic stenting [EPS] with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy [ESWL]) or surgical drainage. Despite the recent popularization of endoscopic drainage, treatment or stent removal is difficult in many patients. We compared the efficacy, safety, and medical cost of endoscopic and surgical treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared the treatment course and medical cost of hospitalization between 41 patients who had undergone pancreatic stenting between 2006 and 2010 (EPS group) and 10 patients who had undergone surgery for poor control of pancreatitis between 2001 and 2005 (surgical drainage group). RESULTS: No intergroup differences were observed in causes, symptoms, disease duration, smoking history, or endocrine and exocrine functions. The technical success rate was 100% in both groups, and pain had improved in all of the patients in both groups. The incidences of complications did not differ significantly, and the mortality rate was 0% in both groups. The rehospitalization rate was significantly higher in the EPS group (78%) than that in the surgical drainage group (20%; P<0.01). This was considered attributable to rehospitalization for stent replacement. The effects to improve endocrine and exocrine functions were not different between the two groups before and after treatment, and the current condition was maintained in 80% or more of the patients. For the entire EPS group, the mean hospitalization period was 18 days and the mean medical cost of hospitalization was 2,133,330 yen. For the entire surgical drainage group, the mean hospitalization period was 23 days and the mean medical cost of hospitalization was 2,246,548 yen, thus indicating no significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although both endoscopic and surgical treatments achieved high symptom control and safety rates, re-hospitalization is required for stent replacement, which leads to poor cost-effectiveness, particularly in patients in whom stent removal is difficult. Endoscopic treatment for severe pancreatic duct stenosis will need to be advanced and evaluated in the future.

Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing lumen-apposing metal stents with plastic stents in the management of pancreatic walled-off necrosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided transmural drainage is effective in the management of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). A lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) has recently been developed specifically for the drainage of pancreatic fluid collections that shows promising results. However, no cost-effectiveness data have been published in comparison with endoscopic drainage with traditional plastic stents (PSs). Our aim here was to compare the cost-effectiveness of LAMSs to PSs in the management of WON. METHODS: A decision tree was developed to assess both LAMSs and PSs over a 6-month time horizon. For each strategy, after the insertion of the respective stents, patients were followed for subsequent need for direct endoscopic necrosectomy, adverse events requiring unplanned endoscopy, percutaneous drainage (PCD), or surgery using probabilities obtained from the literature. The unit of effectiveness was defined as successful endoscopic drainage without the need for PCD or surgery. Costs in 2016 U.S.$ were based on inpatient institutional costs. Sensitivity analyses were performed. An a priori willingness-to-pay threshold of U.S.$50,000 was established. RESULTS: LAMSs were found to be more efficacious than PSs, with 92% and 84%, respectively, of the patients achieving successful endoscopic drainage of WON. LAMSs, however, were more costly: the average cost per patient of U.S.$20,029 compared with U.S.$15,941 for PSs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio favored LAMSs at U.S.$49,214 per additional patient successfully treated. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSION: LAMSs are more effective but also more costly than PSs in managing WON. Data from high-quality, adequately controlled, prospective, randomized trials are needed to confirm our findings.

Endoscopic versus surgical drainage treatment of calcific chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic therapy and surgery are both conventional treatments to remove pancreatic duct stones that developed during the natural course of chronic pancreatitis. However, few studies comparing the effect and safety between surgery drainage and endoscopic drainage (plus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy, ESWL).The aim of this study was to compare the benefits between endoscopic and surgical drainage of the pancreatic duct for patients with calcified chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: A total of 86 patients were classified into endoscopic/ESWL (n = 40) or surgical (n = 46) treatment groups. The medical records of these patients were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Pain recurrence and hospital stays were similar between the endoscopic/ESWL treatment and surgery group. However, endoscopic/ESWL treatment yielded significantly lower medical expense and less complications compared with the surgical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In selective patients, endoscopic/ESWL treatment could achieve comparable efficacy to the surgical treatment. With lower medical expense and less complications, endoscopic/ESWL treatment would be much preferred to be the initial treatment of choice for patients with calcified chronic pancreatitis.

Costs associated with Barrett's esophagus screening in the community: an economic analysis of a prospective randomized controlled trial of sedated versus hospital unsedated versus mobile community unsedated endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data on the economic impact associated with screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) are limited. As part of a comparative effectiveness randomized trial of unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) and sedated EGD (sEGD), we assessed costs associated with BE screening. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to 3 techniques: sEGD or uTNE in a hospital setting (huTNE) versus uTNE in a mobile research van (muTNE). Patients were called 1 and 30 days after screening to assess loss of work (because of the screening procedure) and medical care sought after procedure. Direct medical costs were extracted from billing claims databases. Indirect costs (loss of work for subject and caregiver) were estimated using patient reported data. Statistical analyses including multivariable analysis accounting for comorbidities were conducted to compare costs. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients were screened (61 sEGD, 72 huTNE, and 76 muTNE). Thirty-day direct medical costs and indirect costs were significantly higher in the sEGD than the huTNE and muTNE groups. Total costs (direct medical + indirect costs) were also significantly higher in the sEGD than in the uTNE group. The muTNE group had significantly lower costs than the huTNE group. Adjustment for age, sex, and comorbidities on multivariable analysis did not change this conclusion. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term direct, indirect, and total costs of screening are significantly lower with uTNE compared with sEGD. Mobile uTNE costs were lower than huTNE costs, raising the possibility of mobile screening as a novel method of screening for BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Role of early endoscopic evaluation in decreasing morbidity, mortality, and cost after caustic ingestion: a retrospective nationwide database analysis.

Caustic substance ingestion (CSI) is a serious medical problem with potentially devastating short- and long-term consequences. Early upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EaEn) is recommended to evaluate the extent of injury and guide management but there has been controversy about the timing. There is no nationwide study evaluating adherence to EaEn and outcomes following CSI.Nationwide Inpatient Sample database 2003-2011 was used to identify all-age, nonreferral, urgent/emergent admissions with E-International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision codes for CSI. We evaluated the association of undergoing late endoscopy (LaEn, >48 hours since admission) with poor clinical (death or systemic complications) and economic (cost for admission and length of stay above the 75th percentile) outcomes after controlling for other demographic and clinical factors using a multivariate analysis.We identified 21,682 patients with a median age of 37 years, 51% males, 43% Caucasians, with suicidal ingestion reported in 40%. Endoscopy was performed in 6011 patients (37%). The majority had EaEn (43% within 24, and 40% within 24-48 hours), whereas 17% had LaEn.Compared to EaEn group, the LaEn group was associated with a three-fold increase (OR = 2.7, P < 0.001) in the risk for poor clinical outcome: a fourfold increase (OR = 4.6, P < 0.001) in high cost admissions, and a fivefold increase (OR = 4.9, P < 0.001) in prolonged hospitalization. There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes based on endoscopy within 24, and 24-48 hours of admission.In this retrospective nationwide database analysis, undergoing LaEn was associated with both negative clinical and economic outcomes. More studies are needed to further examine the reasons for delaying endoscopy and subsequent management pathways based on the endoscopic findings. Early endoscopic evaluation could potentially improve the clinical outcomes and reduce costs of these admissions.

Economic evaluation of the randomized European Achalasia trial comparing pneumodilation with Laparoscopic Heller myotomy.

BACKGROUND: A recent multicenter randomized trial in achalasia patients has shown that pneumatic dilation resulted in equivalent relief of symptoms compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy. Additionally, the cost of each treatment should be also taken in consideration. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to perform an economic analysis of the European achalasia trial. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed achalasia were enrolled from to 2003 to 2008 in 14 centers in five European countries and were randomly assigned to either pneumatic dilation (PD) or laparoscopic Heller (LHM). The economic analysis was performed in the three centers in three different countries where most patients were enrolled (Amsterdam [NL], Leuven, [B] and Padova [I]) and then applied to all patients included in the study. The total raw costs of the two treatments per patient include the initial costs, the costs of complications, and the costs of retreatments. RESULTS: Two hundred and one patients, 107 (57 males and 50 females, mean age 46 CI: 43-49 years) were randomized to LHM and 94 (59 males and 34 females, mean age 46 CI 43-50 years) to PD. The total cost of PD per patient was quite comparable in the three different centers; €3397 in Padova, €3259 in Amsterdam and €3792 in Leuven. For LHM, the total costs per patient were highest in Amsterdam: €4488 in Padova, €6720 in Amsterdam, and €5856 in Leuven. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the strategy of treating achalasia starting with PD appears the most economic approach, independent of the health system.

Anesthesia Service Use During Outpatient Gastroenterology Procedures Continued to Increase From 2010 to 2013 and Potentially Discretionary Spending Remained High.

OBJECTIVES: Previous studies have identified an increasing number of gastroenterology (GI) procedures using anesthesia services to provide sedation, with a majority of these services delivered to low-risk patients. The aim of this study was to update these trends with the most recent years of data. METHODS: We used Medicare and commercial claims data from 2010 to 2013 to identify GI procedures and anesthesia services based on CPT codes, which were linked together using patient identifiers and dates of service. We defined low-risk patients as those who were classified as ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) physical status class I or II. For those patients without an ASA class listed on the claim, we used a prediction algorithm to impute an ASA physical status. RESULTS: Over 6.6 million patients in our sample had a GI procedure between 2010 and 2013. GI procedures involving anesthesia service accounted for 33.7% in 2010 and 47.6% in 2013 in Medicare patients, and 38.3% in 2010 and 53.0% in 2013 in commercially insured patients. Overall, as more patients used anesthesia services, total anesthesia service use in low-risk patients increased 14%, from 27,191 to 33,181 per million Medicare enrollees. Similarly, we observed a nearly identical uptick in commercially insured patients from 15,871 to 22,247 per million, an increase of almost 15%. During 2010-2013, spending associated with anesthesia services in low-risk patients increased from US$3.14 million to US$3.45 million per million Medicare enrollees and from US$7.69 million to US$10.66 million per million commercially insured patients. CONCLUSIONS: During 2010 to 2013, anesthesia service use in GI procedures continued to increase and the proportion of these services rendered for low-risk patients remained high.

Low Yield and High Cost of Gastric and Duodenal Biopsies for Investigation of Symptoms of Abdominal Pain During Routine Esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) referrals for symptoms of abdominal pain are common. Current guidelines for dyspepsia recommend biopsies of gastric mucosa for Helicobacter pylori in all patients referred for EGD. Our study aimed to determine the clinical yield and cost-effectiveness of gastric and duodenal biopsy in EGDs performed for abdominal pain. METHODS: Three hundred and ninety-one outpatient EGDs performed at a single academic tertiary care center were studied. For each procedure, endoscopic as well as pathologic findings from the stomach and duodenum were then recorded. Charge of biopsy was calculated using the increased charges for professional fees, forceps, and pathology fees when a biopsy was performed. RESULTS: Gastric biopsies were obtained on 304 EGDs performed with 13 (4.2%) patients diagnosed with H. pylori. In patients with abnormal gastric mucosa on EGD, 11 of 167 (6.5%) were positive for H. pylori compared to 2 of 137 (1.4%) with normal appearing mucosa (p = 0.02). Charge per diagnosis of H. pylori for normal mucosa was calculated to be $43,073. Duodenal biopsies were performed in 263 cases. Celiac disease was diagnosed in 4 of 263 cases (1.5%). Of patients with abnormal duodenal mucosa on EGD, 1 of 36 (2.7%) were positive for celiac disease compared to 3 of 227 (1.3%) with normal mucosa (p = 0.57). Charge per diagnosis of celiac disease for normal mucosa was calculated to be $47,580. CONCLUSION: Routine biopsy during EGD for symptoms of abdominal pain has low yield with high costs. Practice of routine biopsies of normal appearing tissue and the present guidelines should be reconsidered in the investigation of abdominal pain with EGD.

The Utility of Endoscopic Biopsies in Patients with Normal Upper Endoscopy.

Background and Aims. Upper endoscopy is a valuable tool in the workup of gastrointestinal (GI) complaints. The purpose of this study is to determine cost and yield of taking biopsies in a normal upper GI tract. Methods. This is a retrospective study where all upper GI biopsies were identified between May 2012 and April 2013, at a tertiary care center. Clinical, procedural, and pathology reports were reviewed to identify patient demographics, procedure information, and pathology diagnosis. Results. Biopsies of the upper GI tract were taken in 1297 patients with normal upper endoscopies. In patients with normal upper endoscopy, 22% of esophageal, 44% of gastric, and 12% of duodenal biopsies were abnormal. The most frequent abnormality was reflux esophagitis in 16% of esophageal biopsies, chronic gastritis in 23% of gastric biopsies, and increased intraepithelial lymphocytes in 6% of duodenal biopsies. The additional cost for taking biopsies in a normal upper GI tract for a diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis was $2963 Canadian (CAD), H. pylori associated gastritis was $1404 CAD, and celiac disease was $3024 CAD. Conclusions. The yield of biopsy in normal upper endoscopy varied with location, but the additional expense can be costly and should be tailored to appropriate clinical situations.

The Impact on Endoscopic Resource Utilization After a Targeted Intervention for Cost-Minimization of EGD and Colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVES: The need to define the cost of endoscopic procedures becomes increasingly important in an era of providing low-cost, high-quality care. We examined the impact of informing endoscopists of the cost of accessories and pathology specimens as a cost-minimization strategy. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational cohort study of therapeutic outpatient esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy. During the pre-intervention phase (phase 1), the endoscopists were not briefed on the cost of accessories or pathology specimens obtained during the procedure. During a 3-week intervention phase and the post-intervention phase (phase 2) endoscopists were informed of the dollar value of accessories and pathology specimens after the completion of all procedures. In all cases the institutional costs (not charges) were used. The endoscopists were blinded to their observation. RESULTS: A total of 969 EGD, colonoscopy, and EGD+colonoscopy performed by 6 endoscopists were reviewed, 456 procedures in phase 1 and 513 procedures in phase 2. There was no significant difference between phases 1 and 2 in total device and pathology cost in dollars (188.8±151.4 vs. 188.9±151.8, P=0.99), total device cost (36.2±107.9 vs. 39.0±95.96, P=0.67) and total pathology cost (152.6±101.3 vs. 149.9±112.5, P=0.70). There was not a significant difference in total device and pathology cost when examined by specific procedures performed, or for any of the endoscopists between phases 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: Making endoscopists more cost conscious by informing them of the costs of each procedure during EGD and colonoscopy does not result in lower procedural costs. Analysis of cost-minimization strategies involving procedures in other health-care settings and procedures using high-cost accessories are warranted.

Timing or Dosing of Intravenous Proton Pump Inhibitors in Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Has Low Impact on Costs.

OBJECTIVES: High-dose intravenous proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) post endoscopy are recommended in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), as they improve outcomes of patients with high-risk lesions. Determine the budget impact of using different PPI regimens in treating non-variceal UGIB, including pre- and post-endoscopic use, continuous infusion (high dose), and intermittent bolus (twice daily) dosing. METHODS: A budget impact analysis using a decision model informed with data from the literature adopting a US third party payer's perspective with a 30-day time horizon was used to determine the total cost per patient (US$2014) presenting with acute UGIB. The base-case employing high-dose pre- and post-endoscopic IV PPI was compared with using only post-endoscopic PPI. For each, continuous or intermittent dosing regimens were assessed with associated incremental costs. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The overall cost per patient is $11,399 when high-dose IV PPIs are initiated before endoscopy. The incremental costs are all inferior in alternate-case scenarios: $106 less if only post-endoscopic high-dose IVs are used; with intermittent IV bolus dosing, the savings are $223 if used both pre and post endoscopy and $191 if only administered post endoscopy. Subgroup analysis suggests cost savings in patients with clean-base ulcers who are discharged early after endoscopy. Results are robust to sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental costs of using different IV PPI regimens are modest compared with total per patient costs.

Correlation of narrow band imaging endoscopy and histopathology in the diagnosis of nonerosive reflux disease.

UNLABELLED: Background /Aim: Narrow band imaging (NBI) is a novel, innovative high-resolution endoscopic technique, which utilizes spectral narrow band filter for the visualization of mucosal patterns and microvasculature. Nonerosive reflux disease (NERD) is a type of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and it is characterized by reflux symptoms without mucosal breaks on white light endoscopy (WLE). Biopsies from distal esophagus of GERD patients show group of histologic features such as basal cell hyperplasia, elongation of lamina propria papillae, and inflammatory cells. The present study was undertaken to evaluate diagnostic utility of NBI endoscopy and biopsy study in NERD patients and also to correlate NBI endoscopy findings with histologic features of GERD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 71 cases of NERD having symptom score more than 10 and those not having erosion on WLE were recruited prospectively and underwent NBI endoscopic examination. Two mucosal biopsies were taken at 3 cm above the squamocolumnar junction. RESULTS: Histologic features of GERD were seen in 50 (70.4%) out of 71 cases. No significant correlation between NBI endoscopic findings with histologic features of GERD was found. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that histopathologic evaluation of distal esophageal mucosa has promising diagnostic value over NBI endoscopy in NERD patients. Use of newly introduced NBI technique requires tremendous familiarity for the detection of the cases of NERD, which show histologic features of GERD.