Cette page a été traduite automatiquement et l'exactitude de la traduction n'est pas garantie. Veuillez vous référer au version anglaise pour un texte source.

The Cost Effectiveness of Endoscopic Ultrasound ( EUS ) Based Strategy in Diagnosis of Common Bile Duct Stones

23 janvier 2015 mis à jour par: Nisa Netinatsunton, Prince of Songkla University

The Cost Effectiveness Between EUS-based Strategy Versus Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography ( ERCP )-Based Strategy in Diagnosis of Common Bile Duct Stones in Patients With Intermediate Risk: a Study in Developing Country.

Multiple reports in the literature showed the efficacy of EUS comparable to ERCP in the diagnosis of common bile duct ( CBD ) stone. The EUS-based strategy has provided the cost effectiveness in diagnosis of CBD stone in defined patient risk groups was showed in previous studies. The aim of our study was to assess the cost effectiveness of EUS based strategy versus ERCP based strategy in diagnosis of CBD stones in patients with intermediate risks for CBD stones in a real working situation in a developing country.

Aperçu de l'étude

Description détaillée

Background: Multiple reports showed the efficacy of EUS comparable to ERCP in the diagnosis of CBD stone. The EUS-based strategy has provided the cost saving in diagnosis of CBD stone in patients with intermediate risk in previous studies in western population. There were multiple parameters involved the cost effectiveness analysis included cost of ERCP, cost of EUS, prevalence of CBD stones, the sensitivity and specificity of EUS and the rate of complications related to EUS and ERCP. These parameter may vary from center to center and from region to region.

Aims: To assess the cost effectiveness of EUS based strategy versus ERCP based strategy in diagnosis of CBD stones in patients with intermediate risk in a developing country.

Method : A prospective study in 141 patients with suspected CBD stones based on clinical, biochemical and imaging by trans-abdominal ultrasonography or computed abdominal tomography. All patients underwent EUS. All patients with high risk for CBD stone underwent ERCP after the EUS. For patients with intermediate risk for CBD stone, ERCP's were done at the discretion of the attending physicians. For patients with ERCP done, the diagnosis of CBD stone was confirmed by ERCP demonstration of CBD stone. In patients with intermediate risk without ERCP done, clinical follow up to assess biliary symptoms and liver function test as surrogated markers for CBD stone at 3 months interval for one year were done. The false negative rate in patients with EUS and ERCP done in this study was used to estimate the false negative rate in patients in clinical surrogated group.

Definition: High risk of CBD stones was defined when CBD stone was detected by US/CT or dilated duct with abnormal liver function test ( LFT ). Intermediate risk of CBD stones was defined when US/CT showed normal bile duct with abnormal LFT or dilated duct with normal LFT.

Cost analysis :The cost of making diagnosis of CBD stone excluding all costs of treatment was analyzed. The cost of all patients with suspected CBD stones undergoing ERCP was calculated and compared with the strategy of EUS follow by ERCP. The cost was evaluated by (1) mean costs of EUS and ERCP based on the actual cost in our center which included costs of medical staffs, disposable materials, drugs, equipment amortization and maintenance. (2) cost associated with complications induced by the procedure.

Statistical analysis: Test performance of the endoscopic ultrasound in diagnosis of CBD stones was analyzed with two by two tables. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated.

Type d'étude

Observationnel

Inscription (Réel)

141

Contacts et emplacements

Cette section fournit les coordonnées de ceux qui mènent l'étude et des informations sur le lieu où cette étude est menée.

Lieux d'étude

    • Songkhla
      • Hatyai, Songkhla, Thaïlande, 90110
        • NKC Institues of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Prince of Songkla University

Critères de participation

Les chercheurs recherchent des personnes qui correspondent à une certaine description, appelée critères d'éligibilité. Certains exemples de ces critères sont l'état de santé général d'une personne ou des traitements antérieurs.

Critère d'éligibilité

Âges éligibles pour étudier

18 ans et plus (Adulte, Adulte plus âgé)

Accepte les volontaires sains

Non

Sexes éligibles pour l'étude

Tout

Méthode d'échantillonnage

Échantillon non probabiliste

Population étudiée

All patients with suspected CBD stones based on clinical, biochemical and imaging by trans-abdominal ultrasonography or computed tomography..

La description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • history of biliary pain or recent cholangitis
  • acute pancreatitis
  • abnormal liver function test
  • dilatation of CBD and or CBD stone detected by trans-abdominal ultrasound and or computed tomography.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • unstable hemodynamics
  • severe coagulopathy
  • refusal to participate

Plan d'étude

Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan d'étude, y compris la façon dont l'étude est conçue et ce que l'étude mesure.

Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?

Détails de conception

Cohortes et interventions

Groupe / Cohorte
Intervention / Traitement
High risk group
High risk group was defined when CBD stones was detected by ultrasound ( US ) / computed tomography ( CT ) or dilated duct with abnormal LFT.
Patients with high risk underwent EUS examination under conscious sedation. EUS was examined from second part of duodenum up to duodenal bulb. All patients even if negative EUS examination of CBD stone were underwent ERCP in the same session. The ERCPs were performed in standard manner. All patients were contacted by phone on day 1, 3 and 30 after the procedure.
Autres noms:
  • EUS examination follow by ERCP
Intermediate risk group
Intermediate risk group was defined when US/CT showed normal bile duct with abnormal LFT or dilated duct with normal LFT.
Patients with intermediate risk underwent EUS examination under conscious sedation. EUS was examined from second part of duodenum up to duodenal bulb. ERCPs were done at the discretion of the attending physicians. The ERCPs were performed in standard manner. The patients without ERCP done were contacted at 3 months interval to assess symptoms and LFT for 12 months.
Autres noms:
  • EUS examination follow by ERCP or clinical follow up

Que mesure l'étude ?

Principaux critères de jugement

Mesure des résultats
Description de la mesure
Délai
The cost of making diagnosis of CBD stone
Délai: within 12 months after EUS
The cost of making diagnosis of CBD stone will be measured as the difference in the cost of all patients undergoing ERCP and ERCP follow by EUS intervention. The cost was evaluated by (1) mean costs of EUS and ERCP based on the actual cost in our center which included costs of medical staffs, disposable materials, drugs, equipment amortization and maintenance. (2) costs associated with complications induced by the procedure.
within 12 months after EUS

Mesures de résultats secondaires

Mesure des résultats
Description de la mesure
Délai
The accuracy of EUS in diagnosis of CBD stone
Délai: within 12 months after EUS
This will be measured as proportion of patients who encounter a correctly diagnosis of CBD stone by EUS. Positive EUS finding was confirmed by ERCP. Negative EUS finding was confirmed by ERCP or absence of symptoms for 12 months.
within 12 months after EUS
The safety of EUS and ERCP procedure
Délai: within 1 months
This will be measured as proportion of patients who encounter a procedural complication (%) during EUS and ERCP that includes pancreatitis, perforation or hemorrhage
within 1 months

Collaborateurs et enquêteurs

C'est ici que vous trouverez les personnes et les organisations impliquées dans cette étude.

Les enquêteurs

  • Directeur d'études: Bancha Ovartlarnporn, MD, NKC Institue of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hatyai, Songkla, Thailand.

Dates d'enregistrement des études

Ces dates suivent la progression des dossiers d'étude et des soumissions de résultats sommaires à ClinicalTrials.gov. Les dossiers d'étude et les résultats rapportés sont examinés par la Bibliothèque nationale de médecine (NLM) pour s'assurer qu'ils répondent à des normes de contrôle de qualité spécifiques avant d'être publiés sur le site Web public.

Dates principales de l'étude

Début de l'étude

1 mai 2012

Achèvement primaire (Réel)

1 décembre 2013

Achèvement de l'étude (Réel)

1 décembre 2014

Dates d'inscription aux études

Première soumission

16 janvier 2015

Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité

23 janvier 2015

Première publication (Estimation)

29 janvier 2015

Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude

Dernière mise à jour publiée (Estimation)

29 janvier 2015

Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité

23 janvier 2015

Dernière vérification

1 janvier 2015

Plus d'information

Termes liés à cette étude

Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .

S'abonner