FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2170054206> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2170054206 endingPage "118" @default.
• W2170054206 startingPage "109" @default.
• W2170054206 abstract "Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is considered the gold standard for imaging of the biliary tract but is associated with complications. Less invasive imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), have a much lower complication rate. The accuracy of MRCP is comparable to that of ERCP, and MRCP may be more effective and cost-effective, particularly in cases for which the suspected prevalence of disease is low and further intervention can be avoided. A model was constructed to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MRCP and ERCP in patients with a previous history of cholecystectomy, presenting with abdominal pain and/or abnormal liver function tests. Methods: Diagnostic accuracy estimates came from a systematic review of MRCP. A decision analytic model was constructed to represent the diagnostic and treatment pathway of this patient group. The model compared the following two diagnostic strategies: (i) MRCP followed with ERCP if positive, and then management based on ERCP; and (ii) ERCP only. Deterministic and probabilistic analyses were used to assess the likelihood of MRCP being cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses examined the impact of prior probabilities of common bile duct stones (CBDS) and test performance characteristics. The outcomes considered were costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and cost per additional QALY. Results: The deterministic analysis indicated that MRCP was dominant over ERCP. At prior probabilities of CBDS, less than 60 percent MRCP was the less costly initial diagnostic test; above this threshold, ERCP was less costly. Similarly, at probabilities of CBDS less than 68 percent, MRCP was also the more effective strategy (generated more QALYs). Above this threshold, ERCP became the more effective strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that, in this patient group for which there is a low to moderate probability of CBDS, there was a 59 percent likelihood that MRCP was cost-saving, an 83 percent chance that MRCP was more effective with a higher quality adjusted survival, and an 83 percent chance that MRCP had a cost-effectiveness ratio more favorable than $50,000 per QALY gained. Conclusions: Costs and cost-effectiveness are dependent upon the prior probability of CBDS. However, probabilistic analysis indicated that, with a high degree of certainty, MRCP was the more effective and cost-effective initial test in postcholecystectomy patients with a low to moderate probability of CBDS." @default.
• W2170054206 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2170054206 creator A5052465499 @default.
• W2170054206 creator A5053664013 @default.
• W2170054206 creator A5054317872 @default.
• W2170054206 creator A5056715719 @default.
• W2170054206 creator A5073684742 @default.
• W2170054206 creator A5077107645 @default.
• W2170054206 date "2006-01-01" @default.
• W2170054206 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2170054206 title "Value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in the diagnosis of biliary abnormalities in postcholecystectomy patients: A probabilistic cost-effectiveness analysis of diagnostic strategies" @default.
• W2170054206 cites W1861389954 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W1967246198 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W1972840218 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W1979011511 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W1983814416 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W2061317386 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W2073256621 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W2130422243 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W2132916828 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W2146074851 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W2168918445 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W2320210611 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W2336895861 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W268967917 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W4241357923 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W4243651637 @default.
• W2170054206 cites W4254286669 @default.
• W2170054206 doi "https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462306050902" @default.
• W2170054206 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16673687" @default.
• W2170054206 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W2170054206 type Work @default.
• W2170054206 sameAs 2170054206 @default.
• W2170054206 citedByCount "27" @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062013 @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062014 @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062015 @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062016 @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062017 @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062018 @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062019 @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062022 @default.
• W2170054206 countsByYear W21700542062023 @default.
• W2170054206 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2170054206 hasAuthorship W2170054206A5052465499 @default.
• W2170054206 hasAuthorship W2170054206A5053664013 @default.
• W2170054206 hasAuthorship W2170054206A5054317872 @default.
• W2170054206 hasAuthorship W2170054206A5056715719 @default.
• W2170054206 hasAuthorship W2170054206A5073684742 @default.
• W2170054206 hasAuthorship W2170054206A5077107645 @default.
• W2170054206 hasBestOaLocation W21700542062 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C112930515 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C143409427 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C2775967933 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C2775982439 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C2776474662 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C2776641081 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C2776884468 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C2778444009 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C2780603604 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C3019080777 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C40993552 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C515549039 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C112930515 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C126838900 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C141071460 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C143409427 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C2775967933 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C2775982439 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C2776474662 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C2776641081 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C2776884468 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C2778444009 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C2780603604 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C3019080777 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C40993552 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C515549039 @default.
• W2170054206 hasConceptScore W2170054206C71924100 @default.
• W2170054206 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2170054206 hasLocation W21700542061 @default.
• W2170054206 hasLocation W21700542062 @default.
• W2170054206 hasLocation W21700542063 @default.
• W2170054206 hasOpenAccess W2170054206 @default.
• W2170054206 hasPrimaryLocation W21700542061 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W1853654687 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W2040012410 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W2049743881 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W2398500455 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W2402623040 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W2471553666 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W2487073541 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W2727589279 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W4234178559 @default.
• W2170054206 hasRelatedWork W4252067876 @default.
• W2170054206 hasVolume "22" @default.

• next