Small bowel angioectasia-The clinical and cost impact of different management strategies

Abstract

Background: The management of patients with recurrent anaemia and small bowel angioectasia (SBA) is costly and challenging.

Aims/methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we examined the clinical and cost implication of a combination therapy of Somatostatin analogues (SA) and endoscopic ablation, endoscopic therapy alone, and conservative management.

Results: Median number of bleeding episodes reduced from 3.5 (IQR 4) in the year before, to 1 (IQR 2) in the year after starting combination therapy with SA (p = 0.002). There were no differences in number of bed days (13.7 vs. 15.3, p = 0.66) and cost (£10,835 vs £11,653, p = 0.73) in the year before and after starting combination therapy. There was a trend towards a reduction in median number of blood transfusions episodes (17 vs 5, p = 0.07) and therapeutic endoscopies (1 vs. 0, p = 0.05) after starting SA. In patients suitable for endoscopic therapy alone, time spent in hospital was reduced (-3.5 days, p = 0.004), but bleeding episodes, transfusions and cost of treatment were not different. Patients requiring a combination therapy were significantly more co-morbid with a mean (± sd) Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) of 7.1 (± 2.7). Higher CCI (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-3.9) and presence of chronic renal failure (OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.4-12.4) predicted escalation to combination therapy.

Conclusions: SAs may be a useful adjunct to endoscopic therapy for transfusion dependent comorbid patients. In the first year they reduce bleeding episodes. Cost in the 1-year before and after adding on SA are no different suggesting additional clinical benefit can be gained without additional cost.

Keywords: Cost effectiveness; Double balloon enteroscopy; Gastrointestinal bleeding; Small bowel angioectasia; Somatostatin analogues.