OBJECTIVE: To conduct an economic analysis (EA) of coronary calcium scoring (CCS) using a 0 score, as alternative to stress electrocardiography (sECG) in diagnosing coronary artery disease (CAD). METHOD: A decision tree was constructed to compare four strategies for investigation of suspected CAD previously assessed in the formulation of clinical guidelines for the United Kingdom (UK) to two new strategies incorporating CCS. Sensitivity (96%; 95% CI 95.4-96.4%) and specificity (40%; 95% CI 38.7-41.4%) values for CCS were derived from a meta-analysis of 10,760 patients. Other input variables were obtained from a previous EA and average prices for hospital procedures in the UK. A threshold of £30,000/Quality-adjusted Life Year (QALY) was considered cost-effective. RESULTS: Using net monetary benefit calculations, CCS-based strategies were found to be cost-effective compared to sECG equivalents at all assessed prevalence of CAD. Using CCS prior to myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) and catheter angiography (CA) was found to be cost-effective at pre-test probabilities (PTP) below 30%. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of CCS as an alternative to sECG in investigating suspected stable angina in low PTP population (<30%) would be cost-effective. In patients with PTP of CAD >30%, proceeding to MPS or CA would be more cost-effective than performing either CCS or sECG. KEY POINTS: Coronary calcium scoring (CCS) is useful for assessing coronary artery atherosclerosis It can be performed with multi-detector CT, which is now widely available It plays a role in excluding disease in suspected stable angina Our study assesses its role in this setting as alternative to stress-ECG Adoption of CCS as an alternative to sECG could prove cost-effective.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct an economic analysis (EA) of coronary calcium scoring (CCS) using a 0 score, as alternative to stress electrocardiography (sECG) in diagnosing coronary artery disease (CAD). METHOD: A decision tree was constructed to compare four strategies for investigation of suspected CAD previously assessed in the formulation of clinical guidelines for the United Kingdom (UK) to two new strategies incorporating CCS. Sensitivity (96%; 95% CI 95.4-96.4%) and specificity (40%; 95% CI 38.7-41.4%) values for CCS were derived from a meta-analysis of 10,760 patients. Other input variables were obtained from a previous EA and average prices for hospital procedures in the UK. A threshold of £30,000/Quality-adjusted Life Year (QALY) was considered cost-effective. RESULTS: Using net monetary benefit calculations, CCS-based strategies were found to be cost-effective compared to sECG equivalents at all assessed prevalence of CAD. Using CCS prior to myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) and catheter angiography (CA) was found to be cost-effective at pre-test probabilities (PTP) below 30%. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of CCS as an alternative to sECG in investigating suspected stable angina in low PTP population (<30%) would be cost-effective. In patients with PTP of CAD >30%, proceeding to MPS or CA would be more cost-effective than performing either CCS or sECG. KEY POINTS: Coronary calcium scoring (CCS) is useful for assessing coronary artery atherosclerosis It can be performed with multi-detector CT, which is now widely available It plays a role in excluding disease in suspected stable angina Our study assesses its role in this setting as alternative to stress-ECG Adoption of CCS as an alternative to sECG could prove cost-effective.
Authors: R A O'Rourke; B H Brundage; V F Froelicher; P Greenland; S M Grundy; R Hachamovitch; G M Pohost; L J Shaw; W S Weintraub; W L Winters; J S Forrester; P S Douglas; D P Faxon; J D Fisher; G Gregoratos; J S Hochman; A M Hutter; S Kaul; M J Wolk Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-07-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Andreas Knez; Alexander Becker; Alexander Leber; Carl White; Christoph R Becker; Maximilian F Reiser; Gerhard Steinbeck; Peter Boekstegers Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2004-05-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Philip Greenland; Robert O Bonow; Bruce H Brundage; Matthew J Budoff; Mark J Eisenberg; Scott M Grundy; Michael S Lauer; Wendy S Post; Paolo Raggi; Rita F Redberg; George P Rodgers; Leslee J Shaw; Allen J Taylor; William S Weintraub; Robert A Harrington; Jonathan Abrams; Jeffrey L Anderson; Eric R Bates; Cindy L Grines; Mark A Hlatky; Robert C Lichtenberg; Jonathan R Lindner; Gerald M Pohost; Richard S Schofield; Samuel J Shubrooks; James H Stein; Cynthia M Tracy; Robert A Vogel; Deborah J Wesley Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-01-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Matthew J Budoff; Stephan Achenbach; Roger S Blumenthal; J Jeffrey Carr; Jonathan G Goldin; Philip Greenland; Alan D Guerci; Joao A C Lima; Daniel J Rader; Geoffrey D Rubin; Leslee J Shaw; Susan E Wiegers Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-10-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: R Haberl; A Becker; A Leber; A Knez; C Becker; C Lang; R Brüning; M Reiser; G Steinbeck Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: G Mowatt; L Vale; M Brazzelli; R Hernandez; A Murray; N Scott; C Fraser; L McKenzie; H Gemmell; G Hillis; M Metcalfe Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Matthijs Oudkerk; Arthur E Stillman; Sandra S Halliburton; Willi A Kalender; Stefan Möhlenkamp; Cynthia H McCollough; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Leslee J Shaw; William Stanford; Allen J Taylor; Peter M A van Ooijen; Lewis Wexler; Paolo Raggi Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2008-05-27 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Elsemiek M Engbers; Jorik R Timmer; Jan Paul Ottervanger; Mohamed Mouden; Ad H J Oostdijk; Siert Knollema; Pieter L Jager Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-09-22 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Edward Hulten; Marcio Sommer Bittencourt; Brian Ghoshhajra; Daniel O'Leary; Mitalee P Christman; Michael J Blaha; Quynh Truong; Kyle Nelson; Philip Montana; Michael Steigner; Frank Rybicki; Jon Hainer; Thomas J Brady; Udo Hoffmann; Marcelo F Di Carli; Khurram Nasir; Suhny Abbara; Ron Blankstein Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2014-01-08 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Ullrich Ebersberger; Dov Eilot; Roman Goldenberg; Alon Lev; J Reid Spears; Garrett W Rowe; Nicholas Y Gallagher; William T Halligan; Philipp Blanke; Marcus R Makowski; Aleksander W Krazinski; Justin R Silverman; Fabian Bamberg; Alexander W Leber; Ellen Hoffmann; U Joseph Schoepf Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-09-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Márcio Sommer Bittencourt; Michael J Blaha; Ron Blankstein; Matthew Budoff; Jose D Vargas; Roger S Blumenthal; Arthur S Agatston; Khurram Nasir Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 24.094