Literature DB >> 18773981

Cost-efficiency of myocardial contrast echocardiography in patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain of suspected cardiac origin and a nondiagnostic electrocardiogram.

Jared J Wyrick1, Saul Kalvaitis, K John McConnell, Diana Rinkevich, Sanjiv Kaul, Kevin Wei.   

Abstract

Assessment of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected cardiac chest pain and a nondiagnostic electrocardiogram (ECG) is lengthy and costly. It was hypothesized that myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) can be cost-efficient in such patients by detecting those with chest pain that is noncardiac in nature. Accordingly, cost-efficiency was evaluated in 957 patients presenting to the ED with suspected cardiac chest pain, but no ST-segment elevation on the ECG, who underwent MCE. Economic outcome calculations were based on costs estimated from national average Medicare charges adjusted by a cost-charge ratio. Based on routine clinical criteria, 641 patients (67%) were admitted to the hospital, whereas 316 (33%) were discharged directly from the ED. The average cost per patient using routine evaluation was $5,000. Patients with normal MCE results (n = 523) had a very low primary event rate (death, acute myocardial infarction) of 0.6% within 24 hours after presentation, making it relatively safe to discharge patients directly from the ED with a normal MCE result. Hence, if MCE had been used for decision making, 523 patients (55%) would have been discharged directly from the ED and 434 (45%) would have been admitted to the hospital. Preventing unnecessary admissions and tests would have saved an average of $900 per patient, in addition to reducing their ED stay. In conclusion, by excluding cardiac causes in patients presenting to the ED with chest pain and a nondiagnostic ECG, MCE can prevent unnecessary admissions and downstream resource utilization, making it a cost-efficient tool in the evaluation of these patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18773981      PMCID: PMC2597067          DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.05.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  15 in total

Review 1.  Cost-effectiveness analysis and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios: uses and pitfalls.

Authors:  Kiran Bambha; W Ray Kim
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.566

2.  Clinical characteristics and natural history of patients with acute myocardial infarction sent home from the emergency room.

Authors:  T H Lee; G W Rouan; M C Weisberg; D A Brand; D Acampora; C Stasiulewicz; J Walshon; G Terranova; L Gottlieb; B Goldstein-Wayne
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1987-08-01       Impact factor: 2.778

3.  Myocardial contrast echocardiography versus Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction score in patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain and a nondiagnostic electrocardiogram.

Authors:  Khim Leng Tong; Sanjiv Kaul; Xin-Qun Wang; Diana Rinkevich; Saul Kalvaitis; Todd Belcik; Wolfgang Lepper; William A Foster; Kevin Wei
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2005-09-06       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  Applicability of cardiac troponin T and I for early risk stratification in unstable coronary artery disease. TRIM Study Group. Thrombin Inhibition in Myocardial ischemia.

Authors:  M S Lüscher; K Thygesen; J Ravkilde; L Heickendorff
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1997-10-21       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Effect of time delay on the diagnostic use of contrast echocardiography in patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain and no S-T segment elevation.

Authors:  Saul Kalvaitis; Sanjiv Kaul; Khim Leng Tong; Diana Rinkevich; Todd Belcik; Kevin Wei
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 5.251

6.  Clinical Features of Emergency Department Patients Presenting with Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Cardiac Ischemia: A Multicenter Study.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.300

7.  Acute chest pain in the emergency room. Identification and examination of low-risk patients.

Authors:  T H Lee; E F Cook; M Weisberg; R K Sargent; C Wilson; L Goldman
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1985-01

8.  Immediate exercise testing to evaluate low-risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain.

Authors:  Ezra A Amsterdam; J Douglas Kirk; Deborah B Diercks; William R Lewis; Samuel D Turnipseed
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2002-07-17       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  Cardiac-specific troponin I levels to predict the risk of mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  E M Antman; M J Tanasijevic; B Thompson; M Schactman; C H McCabe; C P Cannon; G A Fischer; A Y Fung; C Thompson; D Wybenga; E Braunwald
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-10-31       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Missed diagnoses of acute myocardial infarction in the emergency department: results from a multicenter study.

Authors:  B D McCarthy; J R Beshansky; R B D'Agostino; H P Selker
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 5.721

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  The role of non-invasive imaging in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  C Roobottom; G Mitchell; S Iyengar
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Contrast echocardiography: what have we learned from the new guidelines?

Authors:  Kevin Wei
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 3.  Noninvasive cardiac imaging in suspected acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Pankaj Garg; S Richard Underwood; Roxy Senior; John P Greenwood; Sven Plein
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 4.  Myocardial contrast echocardiography after myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Hiroshi Ito
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.931

5.  A predictive instrument using contrast echocardiography in patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain and without ST-segment elevation.

Authors:  Kevin Wei; Dawn Peters; Todd Belcik; Saul Kalvaitis; Lisa Womak; Diana Rinkevich; Khim-Leng Tong; Kenneth Horton; Sanjiv Kaul
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2010-04-24       Impact factor: 5.251

6.  Stress echocardiography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2010-06-01

7.  64-slice computed tomographic angiography for the diagnosis of intermediate risk coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2010-06-01

8.  Stress echocardiography with contrast for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2010-06-01

9.  Single photon emission computed tomography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2010-06-01

10.  Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2010-06-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.