Methods: A Markov decision model was adapted to simulate a hypothetical cohort of CKD patients requiring treatment for hyperphosphatemia. Survival was estimated by using efficacy data from the INDEPENDENT-CKD clinical trial. Cost data was obtained from Malaysian studies while health state utilities were derived from literature. Analysis was performed over lifetime duration from the perspective of the Ministry of Health Malaysia with 2013 as reference year.
Results: In the base case analysis, sevelamer treatment gained 6.37 life years (5.27 QALY) compared to 4.25 life years (3.54 QALY) with CaCO3. At 3% discount, lifetime costs were RM159,901 ($48,750) and RM77,139 ($23,518) on sevelamer and CaCO3, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) of sevelamer versus CaCO3 was RM47,679 ($14,536) per QALY, which is less than the WHO threshold of three times GDP per capita (RM99,395) per QALY. Sensitivity analyses, both using scenario sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, showed the result to be robust.
Conclusions: Our study finds that sevelamer is potentially cost-effective compared to CaCO3, for the treatment of hyperphosphatemia in predialysis CKD III-V. We propose that sevelamer should be an option in the treatment of Malaysian predialysis patients with hyperphosphatemia, particularly those with high calcium load.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five participants underwent MRE as an initial investigation or follow-up for inflammatory bowel disease. A systematic sampling method was used to divide the participants into three different groups: group 1 received 6.7% mannitol concentration, group 2 received 3.3% mannitol concentration and group 3 received pineapple juice as an oral contrast agent during their MRE examination. The degree of bowel distension on MRE images was assessed by a radiologist by measuring the bowel diameter from inner wall to inner wall at specified levels, while qualitative analysis was evaluated based on the presence of artefacts. All patients were asked to score their acceptance of the oral contrast and were asked about side effects such as diarrhoea, abdominal discomfort and vomiting.
RESULTS: All patients were able to completely ingest 1.5L of oral contrast. The mean diameter of bowel distension was 2.1cm in patients who received 6.7% mannitol concentration, 2.0cm in patients who received 3.3% mannitol concentration and 1.6 cm in patients who received pineapple juice. Twothirds of patients who received 6.7% mannitol and 3.3% mannitol solutions had good-quality MRE images, but 68% of patients who received pineapple juice had poor-quality MRE images. Twenty-four patients (96%) who received pineapple juice rated it as slightly acceptable and acceptable but only 12 patients (48%) who received 6.7% mannitol solution rated it as slightly acceptable and acceptable. Eighty-eight percent of patients who received 6.7% mannitol solution experienced at least one form of side effect as compared to 44% of patients who received 3.3% mannitol solution and 18% of patients who received pineapple juice.
CONCLUSION: Optimum small bowel distension and good image quality can be achieved using 3.3% mannitol concentration as an oral contrast agent. Increase in mannitol concentration does not result in significant improvement of small bowel distension or image quality but is instead related to poorer patient acceptance and increased side effects. Pineapple juice is more palatable than mannitol and produces satisfactory small bowel distension. However, the small bowel distension is less uniform when using pineapple juice with a considerable presence of artefacts. Mannitol, 3.3% concentration, is therefore recommended as an endoluminal contrast agent for bowel in MRE.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of hospitalized patients in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, with suspected gastrointestinal TB. We recorded clinical and laboratory characteristics and outcomes. Tissue samples were submitted for histology, microscopy, culture and GeneXpert MTB/RIF®. Patients were followed for up to 2 years.
RESULTS: Among 88 patients with suspected gastrointestinal TB, 69 were included in analyses; 52 (75%) had a final diagnosis of gastrointestinal TB; 17 had a non-TB diagnosis. People with TB were younger (42.7 versus 61.5 years, p = 0.01) and more likely to have weight loss (91% versus 64%, p = 0.03). An algorithm using age 26 g/L, platelets > 340 × 109/L and immunocompromise had good specificity (96.2%) in predicting TB, but very poor sensitivity (16.0%). GeneXpert® performed very well on gastrointestinal biopsies (sensitivity 95.7% versus 35.0% for culture against a gold standard composite case definition of confirmed TB). Most patients (79%) successfully completed treatment and no treatment failure occurred, however adverse events (21%) and mortality (13%) among TB cases were high. We found no evidence that 6 months of treatment was inferior to longer courses.
CONCLUSIONS: The prospective design provides important insights for clinicians managing gastrointestinal TB. We recommend wider implementation of high-performing diagnostic tests such as GeneXpert® on extra-pulmonary samples.