Piotr Nikodem Rudziński1, Mariusz Kruk2, Cezary Kępka2, U Joseph Schoepf3, Katharina Otani4, Tyler J Leonard5, Mariusz Dębski2, Zofia Dzielińska2, Jerzy Pręgowski2, Adam Witkowski2, Witold Rużyłło2, Marcin Demkow2. 1. Institute of Cardiology in Warsaw, Poland. Electronic address: piotr.rudzinski@ikard.pl. 2. Institute of Cardiology in Warsaw, Poland. 3. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA; Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 4. Siemens Healthcare K.K., Tokyo, Japan. 5. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical and safety outcomes of the strategy employing coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) as the first-choice imaging test have recently been demonstrated in the recently published CAT-CAD randomized, prospective, single-center study. Based on prospectively collected data in this patient population, we aimed to perform an initial cost analysis of this approach. METHODS: 120 participants of the CAT-CAD trial (age:60.6 ± 7.9 years, 35% female) were included in the analysis. We analyzed medical resource use during the diagnostic and therapeutic episode of care. We prospectively estimated the cumulative cost for each strategy by multiplying the number of resources by standardized costs in accordance to medical databases and the 2015 Procedural Reimbursement Payment Guide. RESULTS: The total cost of coronary artery disease (CAD) diagnosis was significantly lower in the CCTA group as compared to the direct invasive coronary angiography (ICA) group ($50,176 vs $137,032) with corresponding per-patient cost of $836 vs $2,284, respectively. Similarly, the entire diagnostic and therapeutic episode of care was significantly less expensive in the CCTA group ($227,622 vs $502,827) with corresponding per-patient cost of $4630 vs $8,380, respectively. Overall, the application of CCTA as a first-line diagnostic test in stable patients with indications to ICA resulted in a 63% reduction of CAD diagnosis costs and a 55% reduction composite of diagnosis and treatment costs during 90-days follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Application of CCTA as the first-line anatomic test in patients with suspected significant CAD decreased the total costs of diagnosis. This is likely attributable to reduced numbers of invasive tests and hospitalisations. Initial cost analysis of the CAT-CAD randomized trial suggests that this approach may provide significant cost savings for the entire health system.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Clinical and safety outcomes of the strategy employing coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) as the first-choice imaging test have recently been demonstrated in the recently published CAT-CAD randomized, prospective, single-center study. Based on prospectively collected data in this patient population, we aimed to perform an initial cost analysis of this approach. METHODS: 120 participants of the CAT-CAD trial (age:60.6 ± 7.9 years, 35% female) were included in the analysis. We analyzed medical resource use during the diagnostic and therapeutic episode of care. We prospectively estimated the cumulative cost for each strategy by multiplying the number of resources by standardized costs in accordance to medical databases and the 2015 Procedural Reimbursement Payment Guide. RESULTS: The total cost of coronary artery disease (CAD) diagnosis was significantly lower in the CCTA group as compared to the direct invasive coronary angiography (ICA) group ($50,176 vs $137,032) with corresponding per-patient cost of $836 vs $2,284, respectively. Similarly, the entire diagnostic and therapeutic episode of care was significantly less expensive in the CCTA group ($227,622 vs $502,827) with corresponding per-patient cost of $4630 vs $8,380, respectively. Overall, the application of CCTA as a first-line diagnostic test in stable patients with indications to ICA resulted in a 63% reduction of CAD diagnosis costs and a 55% reduction composite of diagnosis and treatment costs during 90-days follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Application of CCTA as the first-line anatomic test in patients with suspected significant CAD decreased the total costs of diagnosis. This is likely attributable to reduced numbers of invasive tests and hospitalisations. Initial cost analysis of the CAT-CAD randomized trial suggests that this approach may provide significant cost savings for the entire health system.
Authors: J D Schwalm; Shuang Di; Tej Sheth; Madhu K Natarajan; Erin O'Brien; Tara McCready; Jeremy Petch Journal: Cardiovasc Digit Health J Date: 2021-12-24