Dear AuntMinnie Insider,
Is virtual colonoscopy too costly for screening? The very notion could surprise some VC proponents, who are used to VC coming in both cheaper and safer than its conventional colonoscopy counterpart.
But just in time for Halloween, a scary new economic analysis from Canada (and South Carolina) finds that in any realistic scenario, virtual colonoscopy costs more than the conventional exam. Moreover, the authors assert, the handful of lives saved by eliminating the risk of perforation in optical colonoscopy would be offset by additional cancer deaths resulting from missed lesions on VC.
The gastroenterologist-led study doesn't attempt to look at long-term costs, for which the researchers say that sufficient data simply aren't available for accurate forecasting. Yet the group finds enough evidence about the natural history of polyps to predict unreasonably high costs per life-year gained with VC.
A health policy analyst from the University of Wisconsin disputes the results vigorously, charging that the group cherry-picked its data to arrive at conclusions that cannot be justified from the available evidence.
We're all too aware of the politics that often divides gastroenterologists and radiologists on the use of VC screening, but are there important scientific points that haven't been addressed? After you've read the article in today's Virtual Colonoscopy Digital Community, we invite you to post your comments on the matter in our Discussion Groups.
Also, in today's Insider Exclusive article, don't miss Dr. Stuart Taylor and colleagues' painstakingly careful study on polyp measurement in 2D and 3D. The researchers spared no effort to get to the bottom of a critical issue in virtual colonoscopy -- the effects of insufflation, viewing modality, and even reader experience on lesion size. The article, made available today exclusively for our Insider subscribers, includes spine-chilling photos of a real human colon specimen.
