Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus H-graft portacaval shunt in the management of bleeding varices: a cost-benefit analysis.

Autor: Rosemurgy AS 2nd; Department of Surgery, Tampa General Hospital, University of South Florida, USA., Bloomston M, Zervos EE, Goode SE, Pencev D, Zweibel B, Black TJ
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Surgery [Surgery] 1997 Oct; Vol. 122 (4), pp. 794-9; discussion 799-800.
DOI: 10.1016/s0039-6060(97)90089-1
Abstrakt: Background: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is popular in treating portal hypertension because of its perceived efficacy and cost benefits, although it has never been compared with surgical shunting in a cost-benefit analysis. This study was undertaken to determine the cost benefit of TIPS versus small-diameter prosthetic H-graft portacaval shunt (HGPCS).
Methods: Cost of care was determined in 80 patients prospectively randomized to receive TIPS or HGPCS as definitive treatment for bleeding varices, beginning with shunt placement and including subsequent admissions for complications or follow-up related to shunting.
Results: Patients were similar in age, gender, severity of illness/liver dysfunction, and urgency of shunting. After TIPS or HGPCS, variceal rehemorrhage (8 versus O, respectively; p = 0.03), shunt occlusion (13 versus 4; p = 0.03), shunt revision (16 versus 4; p < 0.005), and shunt failure (18 versus 10; p = 0.10) were compared; all were more common after TIPS. Through the index admission, TIPS cost $48,188 +/- $43,355 whereas HGPCS cost $61,552 +/- $47,615. With follow-up, TIPS cost $69,276 +/- $52,712 and HGPCS cost $66,034 +/- $49,118.
Conclusions: Early cost of TIPS was less than, though not different from, cost of HGPCS. With follow-up, costs after TIPS mounted. The initially lower cost of TIPS is offset by higher rates of subsequent occlusion and rehemorrhage.
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: