Literature DB >> 25844996

The optimal imaging strategy for patients with stable chest pain: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Tessa S S Genders, Steffen E Petersen, Francesca Pugliese, Amardeep G Dastidar, Kirsten E Fleischmann, Koen Nieman, M G Myriam Hunink.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimal imaging strategy for patients with stable chest pain is uncertain.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of different imaging strategies for patients with stable chest pain.
DESIGN: Microsimulation state-transition model. DATA SOURCES: Published literature. TARGET POPULATION: 60-year-old patients with a low to intermediate probability of coronary artery disease (CAD). TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: The United States, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. INTERVENTION: Coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography, cardiac stress magnetic resonance imaging, stress single-photon emission CT, and stress echocardiography. OUTCOME MEASURES: Lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: The strategy that maximized QALYs and was cost-effective in the United States and the Netherlands began with coronary CT angiography, continued with cardiac stress imaging if angiography found at least 50% stenosis in at least 1 coronary artery, and ended with catheter-based coronary angiography if stress imaging induced ischemia of any severity. For U.K. men, the preferred strategy was optimal medical therapy without catheter-based coronary angiography if coronary CT angiography found only moderate CAD or stress imaging induced only mild ischemia. In these strategies, stress echocardiography was consistently more effective and less expensive than other stress imaging tests. For U.K. women, the optimal strategy was stress echocardiography followed by catheter-based coronary angiography if echocardiography induced mild or moderate ischemia. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Results were sensitive to changes in the probability of CAD and assumptions about false-positive results. LIMITATIONS: All cardiac stress imaging tests were assumed to be available. Exercise electrocardiography was included only in a sensitivity analysis. Differences in QALYs among strategies were small.
CONCLUSION: Coronary CT angiography is a cost-effective triage test for 60-year-old patients who have nonacute chest pain and a low to intermediate probability of CAD. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Erasmus University Medical Center.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25844996     DOI: 10.7326/M14-0027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  20 in total

1.  Quantification of radiation dose reduction by reducing z-axis coverage in 320-detector coronary CT angiography.

Authors:  David J Murphy; Abhishek Keraliya; Nathan Himes; Ayaz Aghayev; Ron Blankstein; Michael L Steigner
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  The External Validity of Prediction Models for the Diagnosis of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Stable Chest Pain: Insights From the PROMISE Trial.

Authors:  Tessa S S Genders; Adrian Coles; Udo Hoffmann; Manesh R Patel; Daniel B Mark; Kerry L Lee; Ewout W Steyerberg; M G Myriam Hunink; Pamela S Douglas
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-06-14

Review 3.  Non-invasive Risk Stratification for Coronary Artery Disease: Is It Time for Subclassifications?

Authors:  Pupalan Iyngkaran; Samer Noaman; William Chan; Gnanadevan Mahadavan; Merlin C Thomas; Sharmalar Rajendran
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2019-07-25       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 4.  Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging in Patients with Known and Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: What is in it for the Interventional Cardiologist?

Authors:  Gaston A Rodriguez-Granillo; Roxana Campisi; Patricia Carrascosa
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 5.  Delayed enhancement cardiac computed tomography for the assessment of myocardial infarction: from bench to bedside.

Authors:  Gaston A Rodriguez-Granillo
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-04

Review 6.  Imaging the myocardial ischemic cascade.

Authors:  Arthur E Stillman; Matthijs Oudkerk; David A Bluemke; Menko Jan de Boer; Jens Bremerich; Ernest V Garcia; Matthias Gutberlet; Pim van der Harst; W Gregory Hundley; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Dirkjan Kuijpers; Raymond Y Kwong; Eike Nagel; Stamatios Lerakis; John Oshinski; Jean-François Paul; Riemer H J A Slart; Vinod Thourani; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Bernd J Wintersperger
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 2.357

7.  Clinical and Economic Implications of Inconclusive Noninvasive Test Results in Stable Patients With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the PROMISE Trial.

Authors:  Akash Goyal; Neha Pagidipati; C Larry Hill; Brooke Alhanti; James E Udelson; Michael H Picard; Patricia A Pellikka; Udo Hoffmann; Daniel B Mark; Pamela S Douglas
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 7.792

8.  [Radiological imaging to assess individual cardiovascular risk].

Authors:  A D Ordu; K Rippel; L T Garthe; C Scheurig-Münkler; T Kröncke; F Schwarz
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 0.635

9.  Cost-minimization analysis of three decision strategies for cardiac revascularization: results of the "suspected CAD" cohort of the european cardiovascular magnetic resonance registry.

Authors:  Karine Moschetti; Steffen E Petersen; Guenter Pilz; Raymond Y Kwong; Jean-Blaise Wasserfallen; Massimo Lombardi; Grigorios Korosoglou; Albert C Van Rossum; Oliver Bruder; Heiko Mahrholdt; Juerg Schwitter
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2016-01-11       Impact factor: 5.364

10.  Evaluation of computed tomography in patients with atypical angina or chest pain clinically referred for invasive coronary angiography: randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Marc Dewey; Matthias Rief; Peter Martus; Benjamin Kendziora; Sarah Feger; Henryk Dreger; Sascha Priem; Fabian Knebel; Marko Böhm; Peter Schlattmann; Bernd Hamm; Eva Schönenberger; Michael Laule; Elke Zimmermann
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-10-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.