The use of imaging for electrophysiological and devices procedures: a report from the first European Heart Rhythm Association Policy Conference, jointly organized with the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), the Council of Cardiovascular Imaging and the European Society of Cardiac Radiology.

Implantations of cardiac devices therapies and ablation procedures frequently depend on accurate and reliable imaging modalities for pre-procedural assessments, intra-procedural guidance, detection of complications, and the follow-up of patients. An understanding of echocardiography, cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging, nuclear cardiology, X-ray computed tomography, positron emission tomography, and vascular ultrasound is indispensable for cardiologists, electrophysiologists as well as radiologists, and it is currently recommended that physicians should be trained in several imaging modalities. There are, however, no current guidelines or recommendations by electrophysiologists, cardiac imaging specialists, and radiologists, on the appropriate use of cardiovascular imaging for selected patient indications, which needs to be addressed. A Policy Conference on the use of imaging in electrophysiology and device management, with representatives from different expert areas of radiology and electrophysiology and commercial developers of imaging and device technologies, was therefore jointly organized by European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), the Council of Cardiovascular Imaging and the European Society of Cardiac Radiology (ESCR). The objectives were to assess the state of the level of evidence and a first step towards a consensus document for currently employed imaging techniques to guide future clinical use, to elucidate the issue of reimbursement structures and health economy, and finally to define the need for appropriate educational programmes to ensure clinical competence for electrophysiologists, imaging specialists, and radiologists.

Cost evaluation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance versus coronary angiography for the diagnostic work-up of coronary artery disease: application of the European Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance registry data to the German, United Kingdom, Swiss, and United States health care systems.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has favorable characteristics for diagnostic evaluation and risk stratification of patients with known or suspected CAD. CMR utilization in CAD detection is growing fast. However, data on its cost-effectiveness are scarce. The goal of this study is to compare the costs of two strategies for detection of significant coronary artery stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD): 1) Performing CMR first to assess myocardial ischemia and/or infarct scar before referring positive patients (defined as presence of ischemia and/or infarct scar to coronary angiography (CXA) versus 2) a hypothetical CXA performed in all patients as a single test to detect CAD. METHODS: A subgroup of the European CMR pilot registry was used including 2,717 consecutive patients who underwent stress-CMR. From these patients, 21% were positive for CAD (ischemia and/or infarct scar), 73% negative, and 6% uncertain and underwent additional testing. The diagnostic costs were evaluated using invoicing costs of each test performed. Costs analysis was performed from a health care payer perspective in German, United Kingdom, Swiss, and United States health care settings. RESULTS: In the public sectors of the German, United Kingdom, and Swiss health care systems, cost savings from the CMR-driven strategy were 50%, 25% and 23%, respectively, versus outpatient CXA. If CXA was carried out as an inpatient procedure, cost savings were 46%, 50% and 48%, respectively. In the United States context, cost savings were 51% when compared with inpatient CXA, but higher for CMR by 8% versus outpatient CXA. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that from an economic perspective, the use of CMR should be encouraged as a management option for patients with suspected CAD.