Literature DB >> 16178014

Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies prior to carotid endarterectomy.

Jean Marie U-King-Im1, William Hollingworth, Rikin A Trivedi, Justin J Cross, Nicholas J Higgins, Martin J Graves, Sergei Gutnikov, Peter J Kirkpatrick, Elizabeth A Warburton, Nagui M Antoun, Peter M Rothwell, Jonathan H Gillard.   

Abstract

The main objective of this study was to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of five alternative diagnostic strategies for identification of severe carotid stenosis in recently symptomatic patients. A decision-analytical model with Markov transition states was constructed. Data sources included a prospective study involving 167 patients who had screening Doppler ultrasound (DUS), confirmatory contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CEMRA) and confirmatory digital subtraction angiography (DSA), individual patient data from the European Carotid Surgery Trial and other published clinical and cost data. A "selective" strategy, whereby all patients receive DUS and CEMRA (only proceeding to DSA if the CEMRA is positive and the DUS is negative), was most cost-effective. This was both the cheapest imaging and treatment strategy (35,205 dollars per patient) and yielded 6.1590 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), higher than three alternative imaging strategies. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that there was less than a 10% probability that imaging with either DUS or DSA alone are cost-effective at the conventional 50,000 dollars/QALY threshold. In conclusion, DSA is not cost-effective in the routine diagnostic workup of most patients. DUS, with additional imaging in the form of CEMRA, is recommended, with a strategy of "CEMRA and selective DUS review" being shown to be the optimal imaging strategy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16178014     DOI: 10.1002/ana.20591

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Neurol        ISSN: 0364-5134            Impact factor:   10.422


  5 in total

Review 1.  Cost-effective diagnostic cardiovascular imaging: when does it provide good value for the money?

Authors:  Hansel J Otero; Frank J Rybicki; Dan Greenberg; Dimitrios Mitsouras; Jorge A Mendoza; Peter J Neumann
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 2.  Evaluation and Management of Atherosclerotic Carotid Stenosis.

Authors:  James F Meschia; James P Klaas; Robert D Brown; Thomas G Brott
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 7.616

3.  Evaluation of Freehand B-Mode and Power-Mode 3D Ultrasound for Visualisation and Grading of Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis.

Authors:  Johann Otto Pelz; Anna Weinreich; Thomas Karlas; Dorothee Saur
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Quality of acute ischemic stroke care at a tertiary Hospital in Ghana.

Authors:  Frank Kumi; Amos A Bugri; Stephen Adjei; Elvis Duorinaa; Matthew Aidoo
Journal:  BMC Neurol       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 2.474

5.  Whole body magnetic resonance angiography and computed tomography angiography in the vascular mapping of head and neck: an intraindividual comparison.

Authors:  Manuel Kramer; Siegfried A Schwab; Emeka Nkenke; Achim Eller; Ferdinand Kammerer; Matthias May; João F Baigger; Michael Uder; Michael Lell
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 2.151

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.