Choice of long-term strategy for the management of patients with severe esophagitis: A cost-utility analysis
Gastroenterology 112(4):9 (1997) PMID 9097989
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Omeprazole has shown remarkable efficacy and safety in the treatment of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD); similarly, laparoscopic techniques have allowed less morbidity in patients undergoing fundoplication procedures. Concerns about the long-term cost and safety of both strategies have prompted a debate of their role in long-term management of patients with severe erosive esophagitis. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was performed to compare two strategies: laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) vs. omeprazole. A two-stage Markov model was used to obtain cost and efficacy estimates; all estimates were discounted at 3% per year. The time horizon was 5 years. Sensitivity analyses were performed on all relevant variables. RESULTS: Both strategies were similarly effective (4.33 quality-adjusted life years per patient), with omeprazole less expensive than LNF ($6053 vs. $9482 per patient). At 10 years, LNF and omeprazole costs were similar. Efficacy estimates were extremely sensitive to changes in quality of life associated with postoperative symptoms and long-term use of medication. CONCLUSIONS: Medical therapy is the preferred treatment strategy for most patients with severe erosive esophagitis. Individuals with a long life expectancy are good candidates for LNF if postoperative morbidity is low and GERD symptoms remain abated for many years. (Gastroenterology 1997 Apr;112(4):1078-86)
DOI: 10.1016/S0016-5085(97)70118-5
Version: za2963e q8za0 q8zb7 q8zc4 q8zda q8ze0 q8zf5 q8zg7