Search

Background & Aims: The use of computer-aided detection (CAD) increases the adenoma detection rates (ADRs) during colorectal cancer (CRC) screening/surveillance. This study aimed to evaluate the requirements for CAD to be cost-effective and the impact of CAD on adenoma detection by endoscopists with different ADRs., Methods: We developed a semi-Markov microsimulation model to compare the effectiveness of traditional colonoscopy (mean ADR, 26%) to colonoscopy with CAD (mean ADR, 37%). CAD was modeled as having a $75 per-procedure cost. Extensive 1-way sensitivity and threshold analysis were performed to vary cost and ADR of CAD. Multiple scenarios evaluated the potential effect of CAD on endoscopists' ADRs. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life year., Results: When modeling CAD improved ADR for all endoscopists, the CAD cohort had 79 and 34 fewer lifetime CRC cases and deaths, respectively, per 10,000 persons. This scenario was dominant with a cost savings of $143 and incremental effectiveness of 0.01 quality-adjusted life years. Threshold analysis demonstrated that CAD would be cost-effective up to an additional cost of $579 per colonoscopy, or if it increases ADR from 26% to at least 30%. CAD reduced CRC incidence and mortality when limited to improving ADRs for low-ADR endoscopists (ADR <25%), with 67 fewer CRC cases and 28 CRC deaths per 10,000 persons compared with traditional colonoscopy., Conclusions: As CAD is implemented clinically, it needs to improve mean ADR from 26% to at least 30% or cost less than $579 per colonoscopy to be cost-effective when compared with traditional colonoscopy. Further studies are needed to understand the impact of CAD when used in community practice., (Copyright © 2023 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Several strategies are available to address the obesity epidemic and range from noninvasive lifestyle interventions to medications and bariatric surgical procedures. Endoscopic bariatric techniques, such as intragastric balloons, have become an attractive alternative as a tool for weight loss that can augment the effect of lifestyle interventions. This technical review includes multiple systematic reviews performed to support a clinical practice guideline by the American Gastroenterological Association on the role of intragastric balloons as a tool for weight loss. The systematic reviews targeted a priori selected clinical questions about the effectiveness and periprocedural care of intragastric balloons and concomitant and subsequent weight-loss strategies., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background & Aims: There are marked racial and ethnic differences in non-cardia gastric cancer prevalence within the United States. Although gastric cancer screening is recommended in some regions of high prevalence, screening is not routinely performed in the United States. Our objective was to determine whether selected non-cardia gastric cancer screening for high-risk races and ethnicities within the United States is cost effective., Methods: We developed a decision analytic Markov model with the base case of a 50-year-old person of non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic, or Asian race or ethnicity. The cost effectiveness of a no-screening strategy (current standard) for non-cardia gastric cancer was compared with that of 2 endoscopic screening modalities initiated at the time of screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer: upper esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsy examinations and continued surveillance only if intestinal metaplasia or more severe pathology is identified or esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsy examinations continued every 2 years even in the absence of identified pathology. We used prevalence rates, transition probabilities, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from publications and public data sources. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY., Results: Compared with biennial and no screening, screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy with continued surveillance only when indicated was cost effective for non-Hispanic blacks ($80,278/QALY), Hispanics ($76,070/QALY), and Asians ($71,451/QALY), but not for non-Hispanic whites ($122,428/QALY). The model was sensitive to intestinal metaplasia prevalence, transition rates from intestinal metaplasia to dysplasia to local and regional cancer, cost of endoscopy, and cost of resection (endoscopic or surgical)., Conclusions: Based on a decision analytic Markov model, endoscopic non-cardia gastric cancer screening for high-risk races and ethnicities could be cost effective in the United States., (Copyright © 2018 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)