Cost-effectiveness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging compared to common strategies in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review.

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has established exceptional diagnostic utility and prognostic value in coronary artery disease (CAD). An assessment of the current evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CMR in patients referred for the investigation of CAD is essential for developing an economic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CMR in CAD. We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science core collection, Embase, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), and health technology assessment, to identify relevant literature. After removing duplicates and screening the title/abstract, a total of 13 articles were deemed eligible for full-text assessment. We included studies that reported one or more of the following outcomes: incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALYs), cost per life year gained, sensitivity and specificity rate as the primary outcome, and health utility measures or health-related quality of life as the secondary outcome. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the CHEERS 2022 guidelines. The findings of this study demonstrate that in patients undergoing urgent percutaneous coronary intervention, CMR over a one-year and lifetime horizon leads to higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared to current strategies in cases of multivessel disease. The systematic review indicates that the CMR-based strategy is more cost-effective when compared to standard methods such as single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), and coronary angiography (CA) (CMR = $19,273, SPECT = $19,578, CCTA = $19,886, and immediate CA = $20,929). The results also suggest that the CMR strategy can serve as a cost-effective gatekeeping tool for patients at risk of obstructive CAD. A CMR-based strategy for managing patients with suspected CAD is more cost-effective compared to both invasive and non-invasive strategies, particularly in real-world patient populations with a low to intermediate prevalence of the disease.

Prosthetic heart valves and the COVID-19 pandemic era: What should we be concerned about?

BACKGROUND: The disturbance in the international normalized ratio (INR) in patients receiving warfarin therapy is of concern. We aimed to evaluate coagulation features in hospitalized patients under warfarin treatment for prosthetic heart valves during the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia pandemic. METHODS: Between 20 February and 28 March 2020, 10 patients (7 males) who were under warfarin therapy for prosthetic heart valves were hospitalized after a diagnosis of COVID-19 in Tehran Heart Center, Tehran, Iran. The clinical, paraclinical, and in-hospital outcomes were described. The patients were followed for 4 weeks. RESULTS: The median age was 62 years. All the patients received antiviral treatment, either lopinavir/ritonavir or oseltamivir. The serum level of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein ranged between 0.24 and 15.24 mg/dL. Alanine aminotransaminase was normal in all the patients except for two, with levels 1.6 and 4.2 times above normal values. The INR increased in all the patients. One (10%) patient died in the hospital. No bleeding, ischemic, or thrombotic events occurred during the hospital stay and within the 4-week follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Antiviral therapy in patients with COVID-19 with prosthetic heart valves might be an issue responsible for an uncontrolled INR. Liver injury may happen in a minority of patients. Bridging in these patients during the antiviral treatment might be required and because of significant INR fluctuations, it might be safer to prescribe antiviral treatment in an inpatient setting.

Predictive factors of thoracic aortic calcification in patients candidate for cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: The presence of the severe thoracic aortic calcification (TAC) in cardiac surgery patients is associated with adverse post-operative outcome. However, the relationship between cardiovascular risk factors and aortic plaque burden remains unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the predictive factors of TAC in patients candidate for cardiac surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent thoracic CT scan prior to cardiac surgery between August 2020 to April 2021 were included. Of 556 patients, 209 (36.7%) had a thoracic aortic calcium score (TACS) ≥ 400 mm [3] and were compare with the remaining patients. Predictors of severe TAC were assessed through stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The patients with TACS ≥ 400 had a higher mean age (67.3 ± 7.1 vs. 55.7 ± 10.6; p < 0.001) with a higher frequency of diabetes mellitus (40.7% vs. 30.8%; p = 0.018), dyslipidemia (49.8% vs. 38.6%; p = 0.010), hypertension (60.8% vs. 44.7%; p < 0.001), opium addiction (18.2% vs. 11.2%; p = 0.023), peripheral vascular disease (PVD) (7.7% vs. 2.3%; p = 0.005) as compared with TACS < 400. The multiple determinants of TAC were PVD (OR = 2.86) followed by opium addiction, diabetes and age. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic CT scan prior to cardiac surgery for patients with older age, diabetes, opium addiction and PVD is recommended. Our study could serve as a foundation for future research endeavors aimed at establishing a risk score for TAC.

Epidemiological, clinical, and economic burden of myocardial infarction patients in Iran during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: To define changes in AMI case rates, patient demographics, cardiovascular comorbidities, treatment approaches, in-hospital outcomes, and the economic burden of COVID-19 during the pandemic. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, observational survey with selected hospitals from three medical universities in Tehran city. A data collection tool consisting of three parts. The first part included socio-demographic information, and the second part included clinical information, major complications, and in-hospital mortality. Finally, the third part was related to the direct medical costs generated by AMI in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. The study cohort comprised 4,560 hospitalizations for AMI (2,935 for STEMI [64%] and 1,625 for NSTEMI [36%]). Results: Of those hospitalized for AMI, 1,864 (76.6 %) and 1,659 (78 %) were male before the COVID-19 outbreak and during the COVID-19 era, respectively. The length of stay (LOS), was significantly lower during the COVID-19 pandemic era (4.27 ± 3.63 vs 5.24 ± 5.17, p = 0.00). Results showed that there were no significant differences in terms of patient risk factors across periods. A total of 2,126 AMIs were registered during the COVID-19 era, with a 12.65 % reduction (95 % CI 1.5-25.1) compared with the equivalent time in 2019 (P = 0.179). The risk of in-hospital mortality rate for AMI patients increased from 4.9 % in 2019 to 7.0 % in the COVID-19 era (OR = 1.42; 95 % CI 1.11-1.82; P = 0.004). Major complications were registered in 9.7 % of cases in 2020, which is higher than the rate of 6.6 % reported in 2019 (OR = 1.46, 95 % CI 1.11-1.82; P = 0.000). Total costs in hospitalized AMI-COVID patients averaged $188 more than in AMI patients (P = 0.020). Conclusion: This cross-sectional study found important changes in AMI hospitalization rates, worse outcomes, and higher costs during the COVID-19 periods. Future studies are recommended to examine the long-term outcomes of hospitalized AMI patients during the COVID-19 era.