Cited by 119Liver Diseases and ImmunityGallbladder and Bile Duct DisordersPediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments

Cost-minimization analysis of MRC versus ERCP for the diagnosis of primary sclerosing cholangitis

Open access
Talwalkar, Jayant A., Angulo, Paul, Johnson, Daniel C., Petersen, Bret T., Lindor, Keith D.·2004·Hepatology

Abstract

Investigations examining the use of magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC) for the diagnosis of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) have described comparable accuracy when compared to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The effectiveness of MRC based on overall cost, however, remains unknown. Our aim was to determine the average cost per correct diagnosis using MRC or ERCP as the initial testing strategy for the diagnosis of PSC. A decision analysis model was constructed employing diagnostic test parameters prospectively determined among 73 patients with clinically suspected biliary disease. ERCP was performed within 24 hours after MRC. Cost data were derived from average Medicare reimbursement fee schedules. The prevalence of PSC in the study cohort was 32%. The sensitivity and specificity of MRC for the diagnosis of PSC were 82% and 98%, respectively. The average cost per correct diagnosis of PSC was $724.00 for initial MRC (including the cost of ERCP following a negative MRC examination) versus $793.17 for initial ERCP. In the absence of biliary obstruction, the average cost per correct diagnosis of PSC was $549.64 with MRC versus $623.25 for ERCP. The average cost of managing post-ERCP-related complications among patients with PSC was $2902.20 (range, $1915.40-$5031.54). For ERCP to be the optimal initial test strategy, a prevalence rate of PSC greater than 45%, MRC specificity less than 85%, or reduction in the average cost per diagnosis to $538.30 would be required. In conclusion, MRC has comparable accuracy to ERCP and results in cost savings when used as the initial test strategy for diagnosing PSC. (Hepatology 2004;40:39-45.)

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hep.20287

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Advantages of MRCP over ERCP include its noninvasive nature, lack of radiation use, lower cost, and potential to add MR elastography for disease staging and prognosis.

    “Advantages of MRCP over endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) include its noninvasive nature, lack of radiation use and lower cost, in addition to the potential to add MR elastography (MRE) for further information on disease staging and prognosis.28,29”

    From EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on sclerosing cholangitis (2022) · cites this paper as [28]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 24 · Cited by 119

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Mehta SN, Reinhold C, Barkun AN. Magnetic resonance cholangiopan- creatography. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 1997;7:247-270.

Authors
Talwalkar, J. A., Angulo, P., Johnson, D. C., Petersen, B. T., & Lindor, K. D.
Affiliations
Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Talwalkar, Jayant A.
Venue
Hepatology
Published
2004-07
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
39-45
ISSN
0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2024257457
Cited by
119
References
24
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Hepatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver Diseases and Immunity
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments
Keywords
primary sclerosing cholangitis, magnetic resonance cholangiography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, diagnostic costs, decision-analytic model, diagnostic accuracy, post-ERCP complications, biliary tract diseases, Medicare reimbursement
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde, Cost Control, Decision Support Techniques, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Cholangitis, Sclerosing, Health Care Costs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review