FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2122337890> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2122337890 endingPage "1443" @default.
• W2122337890 startingPage "1437" @default.
• W2122337890 abstract "Background & AimsSome patients with refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) actually have undiagnosed celiac disease. These patients often undergo an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) to determine the etiology and severity of GERD. Performing routine duodenal biopsy analysis during an EGD could identify patients with celiac disease. We evaluated the cost effectiveness of this approach.MethodsWe performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE database to identify publications through March 2014 on patients who underwent a duodenal biopsy analysis during an EGD for GERD. Data collected were used to construct a decision tree to calculate the cost effectiveness of an EGD with and without celiac disease tests.ResultsAmong 10,000 patients with refractory GERD who underwent an EGD, we predicted a biopsy strategy would detect 70% of patients with celiac disease if the prevalence of celiac disease was 1% in this cohort. Biopsy analysis at the start of the EGD procedure would increase the remaining quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) by 0.0032, and increase the lifetime cost by $389/patient. Compared with no biopsy, the biopsy strategy cost $55,692.86/case of celiac disease detected, and $121,875/QALY gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the biopsy strategy met the threshold of less than $50,000/QALY when 1 of the following parameters was met: when the utility of living with GERD was less than 0.88, when the prevalence of celiac disease in patients with refractory GERD was greater than 1.8%, when biopsy analysis detected celiac disease with more than 98.1% specificity, when the cost of a gluten-free diet was less than $645.85/y, or if the cost of proton pump inhibitor therapy was more than $5874.01/y.ConclusionsBased on base-case values, it is not cost effective to perform a biopsy analysis to detect celiac disease in patients undergoing an EGD for refractory GERD. However, the approach becomes cost effective when the prevalence of celiac disease in this population is 1.8% or greater. Some patients with refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) actually have undiagnosed celiac disease. These patients often undergo an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) to determine the etiology and severity of GERD. Performing routine duodenal biopsy analysis during an EGD could identify patients with celiac disease. We evaluated the cost effectiveness of this approach. We performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE database to identify publications through March 2014 on patients who underwent a duodenal biopsy analysis during an EGD for GERD. Data collected were used to construct a decision tree to calculate the cost effectiveness of an EGD with and without celiac disease tests. Among 10,000 patients with refractory GERD who underwent an EGD, we predicted a biopsy strategy would detect 70% of patients with celiac disease if the prevalence of celiac disease was 1% in this cohort. Biopsy analysis at the start of the EGD procedure would increase the remaining quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) by 0.0032, and increase the lifetime cost by $389/patient. Compared with no biopsy, the biopsy strategy cost $55,692.86/case of celiac disease detected, and $121,875/QALY gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the biopsy strategy met the threshold of less than $50,000/QALY when 1 of the following parameters was met: when the utility of living with GERD was less than 0.88, when the prevalence of celiac disease in patients with refractory GERD was greater than 1.8%, when biopsy analysis detected celiac disease with more than 98.1% specificity, when the cost of a gluten-free diet was less than $645.85/y, or if the cost of proton pump inhibitor therapy was more than $5874.01/y. Based on base-case values, it is not cost effective to perform a biopsy analysis to detect celiac disease in patients undergoing an EGD for refractory GERD. However, the approach becomes cost effective when the prevalence of celiac disease in this population is 1.8% or greater." @default.
• W2122337890 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2122337890 creator A5010996677 @default.
• W2122337890 creator A5035922576 @default.
• W2122337890 creator A5068405730 @default.
• W2122337890 creator A5091602463 @default.
• W2122337890 date "2015-08-01" @default.
• W2122337890 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2122337890 title "Cost Effectiveness of Routine Duodenal Biopsy Analysis for Celiac Disease During Endoscopy for Gastroesophageal Reflux" @default.
• W2122337890 cites W1544004437 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W1964609332 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W1968973890 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W1975094828 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W1987811453 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W1992504223 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W1994215193 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W1995901896 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2000774337 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2015953642 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2017034271 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2020626093 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2023452797 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2024132270 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2025828526 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2026946462 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2032624073 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2035795539 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2040740431 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2045133291 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2046000663 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2048821674 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2063972709 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2065375131 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2069170359 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2080143666 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2082280734 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2090331375 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2101438051 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2103066215 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2110316537 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2117929976 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2119425622 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2129526998 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2138524381 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2139114869 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2143252307 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2148002819 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2154376692 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2163705113 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2165603463 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W2321993200 @default.
• W2122337890 cites W4236836788 @default.
• W2122337890 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2015.03.022" @default.
• W2122337890 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4509941" @default.
• W2122337890 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25818076" @default.
• W2122337890 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2122337890 type Work @default.
• W2122337890 sameAs 2122337890 @default.
• W2122337890 citedByCount "11" @default.
• W2122337890 countsByYear W21223378902016 @default.
• W2122337890 countsByYear W21223378902018 @default.
• W2122337890 countsByYear W21223378902019 @default.
• W2122337890 countsByYear W21223378902022 @default.
• W2122337890 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2122337890 hasAuthorship W2122337890A5010996677 @default.
• W2122337890 hasAuthorship W2122337890A5035922576 @default.
• W2122337890 hasAuthorship W2122337890A5068405730 @default.
• W2122337890 hasAuthorship W2122337890A5091602463 @default.
• W2122337890 hasBestOaLocation W21223378901 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C2775934546 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C2777014526 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C2778451229 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C2779134260 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C2781143854 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C43270747 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConcept C90924648 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C126322002 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C2775934546 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C2777014526 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C2778451229 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C2779134260 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C2781143854 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C43270747 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C71924100 @default.
• W2122337890 hasConceptScore W2122337890C90924648 @default.
• W2122337890 hasIssue "8" @default.
• W2122337890 hasLocation W21223378901 @default.
• W2122337890 hasLocation W21223378902 @default.
• W2122337890 hasLocation W21223378903 @default.
• W2122337890 hasOpenAccess W2122337890 @default.
• W2122337890 hasPrimaryLocation W21223378901 @default.
• W2122337890 hasRelatedWork W1982560573 @default.
• W2122337890 hasRelatedWork W2356246546 @default.
• W2122337890 hasRelatedWork W2356299640 @default.
• W2122337890 hasRelatedWork W2381168924 @default.
• W2122337890 hasRelatedWork W2412980350 @default.

• next