The cost-effectiveness of CT colonography in screening for colorectal neoplasia |
| |
Authors: | Vijan Sandeep Hwang Inku Inadomi John Wong Roy K H Choi J Richard Napierkowski John Koff Jonathan M Pickhardt Perry J |
| |
Institution: | Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Center for Practice Management and Outcomes Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan;;Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan;;Department of Internal Medicine, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC;;Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California;;Department of Radiology, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC;;Department of Radiology, F. Edward Hebert School of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland;;Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison, Wisconsin |
| |
Abstract: | BACKGROUND: We examined the cost-effectiveness of 2- and 3-dimensional computerized tomography (CT) colonography as a screening test for colorectal neoplasia. METHODS: We created a Markov model of the natural history of colorectal cancer. Effectiveness of screening was based upon the diagnostic accuracy of tests in detecting polyps and cancer. RESULTS: CT colonography every 5 or 10 yr was effective and cost-effective relative to no screening. Optical colonoscopy dominates 2-dimensional CT colonography done every 5 or 10 yr. Optical colonoscopy is weakly dominant over 3-dimensional CT colonography done every 10 yr. 3-D CT colonography done every 5 yr is more effective than optical colonoscopy every 10 yr, but costs an incremental $156,000 per life-year gained. Sensitivity analyses show that test costs, accuracy, and adherence are critical determinants of incremental cost-effectiveness. 3-D CT colonography every 5 yr is a dominant strategy if optical colonoscopy costs 1.6 times more than CT colonography. However, optical colonoscopy is a dominant strategy if the sensitivity of CT colonography for 1 cm adenomas is 83% or lower. CONCLUSIONS: CT colonography is an effective screening test for colorectal neoplasia. However, it is more expensive and generally less effective than optical colonoscopy. CT colonography can be reasonably cost-effective when the diagnostic accuracy of CT colonography is high, as with primary 3-dimensional technology, and if costs are about 60% of those of optical colonoscopy. Overall, CT colonography technology will need to improve its accuracy and reliability to be a cost-effective screening option. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 PubMed 等数据库收录! |
|