Real-world clinical and cost analysis of CT coronary angiography and CT coronary angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT)-guided care in the National Health Service.

AIM: To quantify the real-world clinical and cost impact of computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography (CTCA)-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) in the National Health Service (NHS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive clinical CTCA examinations from September to December 2018 with ≥1 stenosis of ≥25% underwent FFRCT analysis. The Heart Team reviewed clinical data and CTCA findings, blinded to FFRCT values, and documented hypothetical consensus management. FFRCT results were then unblinded and hypothetical consensus management re-recorded. Diagnostic waiting times for management pathways were estimated. A per-patient cost analysis for diagnostic certainty regarding coronary artery disease (CAD) management was performed using 2014-2020 NHS tariffs for pre- and post-FFRCT pathways. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-one CTCAs were performed during the study period. Fifty-seven percent (145/251) had no CAD or stenosis <25%. One study was non-diagnostic. Of the remaining 42% (105/251), two were ineligible for FFRCT and there was a 5% (5/103) failure rate. FFRCT led to a change in hypothetical management in 65% (64/98; p<0.001) patients with a functional imaging test cancelled in 17% (17/98) and a diagnostic angiogram cancelled in 47% (46/98). FFRCT-guided management had a reduced mean time to definitive investigation compared with CTCA alone (28 ± 4 versus 44 ± 4 days; p=0.004). Using the proposed 2020/21 tariff, CTCA + FFRCT for stenosis ≥50% resulted in a diagnostic pathway £44.97 more expensive per patient than usual care without FFRCT. CONCLUSIONS: In the real-world NHS setting, FFRCT-guided management has the potential to rationalise patient management, accelerate diagnostic pathways, and depending on the stenosis severity modelled, may be cost-effective.

Fractional Flow Reserve or Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Management of Angiographically Intermediate Coronary Stenosis: A Single-Center Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare optical coherence tomographic (OCT) guidance and fractional flow reserve (FFR) guidance in patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions (AICLs) in a single-center, prospective, 1:1 randomized trial. BACKGROUND: FFR and OCT imaging may help both in the assessment of AICLs and in percutaneous coronary intervention optimization. METHODS: Patients with AICLs were randomized to FFR or OCT imaging. In the FFR arm, PCI was performed if FFR was ≤0.80. In the OCT imaging arm, PCI was performed if area stenosis was ≥75% or 50% to 75% with minimal luminal area <2.5 mm2 or plaque rupture. Angina (evaluated using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire), major adverse cardiac events, and cost were assessed at the end of follow-up. The pre-defined primary endpoint was the composite of major adverse cardiac events or significant angina (defined as Seattle Angina Questionnaire frequency scale score <90) at 13 months. RESULTS: A total of 350 patients (with 446 AICLs) were enrolled (176 randomized to FFR and 174 to OCT imaging). The primary endpoint of major adverse cardiac events or significant angina at 13 months occurred in 14.8% of patients in the FFR arm and in 8.0% in the OCT imaging arm (p = 0.048). This result was driven by a statistically nonsignificant lower occurrence of all primary endpoint components. Up to 13 months, the rate of medically managed patients was significantly higher (p < 0.001) and total cost significantly lower (p < 0.001) with FFR in comparison with OCT imaging. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AICLs, OCT guidance is associated with lower occurrence of the composite of major adverse cardiac events or significant angina. FFR guidance is associated with a higher rate of medical management and lower costs. FFR or OCT Guidance to Revascularize Intermediate Coronary Stenosis Using Angioplasty [FORZA]; NCT01824030).

Clinical Use of CT-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to examine the feasibility, safety, clinical outcomes, and costs associated with computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) in acute chest pain (ACP) patients in a coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA)-based triage program. BACKGROUND: FFRCT is useful in determining lesion-specific ischemia in patients with stable ischemic heart disease, but its utility in ACP has not been studied. METHODS: ACP patients with no known coronary artery disease undergoing coronary CTA and coronary CTA with FFRCT were studied. FFRCT ≤0.80 was considered positive for hemodynamically significant stenosis. RESULTS: Among 555 patients, 297 underwent coronary CTA and FFRCT (196 negative, 101 positive), whereas 258 had coronary CTA only. The rejection rate for FFRCT was 1.6%. At 90 days, there was no difference in major adverse cardiac events (including death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and unexpected revascularization after the index visit) between the coronary CTA and FFRCT groups (4.3% vs. 2.7%; p = 0.310). Diagnostic failure, defined as discordance between the coronary CTA or FFRCT results with invasive findings, did not differ between the groups (1.9% vs. 1.68%; p = NS). No deaths or myocardial infarction occurred with negative FFRCT when revascularization was deferred. Negative FFRCT was associated with higher nonobstructive disease on invasive coronary angiography (56.5%) than positive FFRCT (8.0%) and coronary CTA (22.9%) (p < 0.001). There was no difference in overall costs between the coronary CTA and FFRCT groups ($8,582 vs. $8,048; p = 0.550). CONCLUSIONS: In ACP, FFRCT is feasible, with no difference in major adverse cardiac events and costs compared with coronary CTA alone. Deferral of revascularization is safe with negative FFRCT, which is associated with higher nonobstructive disease on invasive angiography.

Coronary artery disease risk reclassification by a new acoustic-based score.

To determine the potential of a non-invasive acoustic device (CADScor®System) to reclassify patients with intermediate pre-test probability (PTP) and clinically suspected stable coronary artery disease (CAD) into a low probability group thereby ruling out significant CAD. Audio recordings and clinical data from three studies were collected in a single database. In all studies, patients with a coronary CT angiography indicating CAD were referred to coronary angiography. Audio recordings of heart sounds were processed to construct a CAD-score. PTP was calculated using the updated Diamond-Forrester score and patients were classified according to the current ESC guidelines for stable CAD: low < 15%, intermediate 15-85% and high > 85% PTP. Intermediate PTP patients were re-classified to low probability if the CAD-score was ≤ 20. Of 2245 patients, 212 (9.4%) had significant CAD confirmed by coronary angiography ( ≥ 50% diameter stenosis). The average CAD-score was higher in patients with significant CAD (38.4 ± 13.9) compared to the remaining patients (25.1 ± 13.8; p < 0.001). The reclassification increased the proportion of low PTP patients from 13.6% to 41.8%, reducing the proportion of intermediate PTP patients from 83.4% to 55.2%. Before reclassification 7 (3.1%) low PTP patients had CAD, whereas post-reclassification this number increased to 28 (4.0%) (p = 0.52). The net reclassification index was 0.209. Utilization of a low-cost acoustic device in patients with intermediate PTP could potentially reduce the number of patients referred for further testing, without a significant increase in the false negative rate, and thus improve the cost-effectiveness for patients with suspected stable CAD.

Treatment strategy modification and its implication on the medical cost of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) could improve outcome compared with angiography-guided PCI. However, the economic impact of FFR-guided PCI remains largely unknown in the medical system in Japan. We evaluated the impact of treatment strategy modification by FFR measurement on the direct medical cost using a model analysis with a decision tree model in Japan. METHODS: For the clinical parameters set in the model, the findings from CVIT-DEFER registry were adopted. Cost parameters were considered on the assumption that coronary angiography, FFR measurement, and the treatment are performed at Diagnosis Procedure combination (DPC) hospitals, and the costs were calculated based on the medical fee reimbursement systems in Japan. RESULTS: The probability of deferral of PCI in patients who were allocated to PCI based on coronary angiography was set as 90.1% based on the CVIT-DEFER registry. In the model analysis, the cost of tests was increased by 185,660 JPY per patient by the addition of FFR measurement, but the cost of treatment with PCI was reduced by 561,425 JPY per patient, and the entire cost of treatment was reduced by 322,675 JPY, resulting in the expected reduction in the total expected medical cost by 137,015 JPY per patient. CONCLUSION: Under contemporary Japanese practice, FFR-guided PCI has potential to reduce the medical cost by effective reassessment of coronary stenosis and reducing inappropriate application of PCI.

Navvus FFR to reduce CONTRAst, Cost and radiaTion (CONTRACT); insights from a single-centre clinical and economical evaluation with the RXi Rapid-Exchange FFR device.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether the RXi Navvus system compared to the use of standard Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) wires reduces total contrast volume, radiation and overall study cost in a real world patient population referred for coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention. BACKGROUND: FFR is the mainstay of functional hemodynamic assessment of coronary artery lesions. The RXi Navvus system (ACIST Medical Systems, Eden Prairie, MN) is a monorail microcatheter with FFR-measurement capability through optical pressure sensor technology. METHODS: This is an investigator-initiated, prospective, single-center, observational cohort study. A total of 238 patients were enrolled, 97 patients with Navvus and 141 with conventional pressure-wire based FFR (PW-FFR). Final analyses were performed on the cohort in which only 1 device was used (82 Navvus procedures vs. 136 PW-FFR procedures). RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the total amount of contrast used (150±77 vs 147±79ml; p=0.81), radiation use (6200±4601 vs. 5076±4655 centiG∗cm2; p=0.09) or costs (€1994,- vs. €1930,-; p=0.32) in the Navvus vs. PW-FFR groups respectively. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were found in the amount of contrast used, total procedural costs or radiation when the Navvus system was used as compared to conventional FFR wires. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: CONTRACT is an investigator-initiated, prospective, single-center, observational cohort study that evaluated whether the RXi Navvus system compared to the use of standard Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) wires reduces total contrast volume, radiation and overall study cost in a real world patient population referred for coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention. Use of the RXi Navvus system was associated with comparable procedural costs, amount of radiation and contrast used as compared to PW-FFR systems.

Noninvasive FFR derived from coronary CT angiography in the management of coronary artery disease: technology and clinical update.

After a decade of clinical use of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) to evaluate the anatomic severity of coronary artery disease, new methods of deriving functional information from CCTA have been developed. These methods utilize the anatomic information provided by CCTA in conjunction with computational fluid dynamics to calculate fractional flow reserve (FFR) values from CCTA image data sets. Computed tomography-derived FFR (CT-FFR) enables the identification of lesion-specific drop noninvasively. A three-dimensional CT-FFR modeling technique, which provides FFR values throughout the coronary tree (HeartFlow FFRCT analysis), has been validated against measured FFR and is now approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for clinical use. This technique requires off-site supercomputer analysis. More recently, a one-dimensional computational analysis technique (Siemens cFFR), which can be performed on on-site workstations, has been developed and is currently under investigation. This article reviews CT-FFR technology and clinical evidence for its use in stable patients with suspected coronary artery disease.

Cost benefit for assessment of intermediate coronary stenosis with fractional flow reserve in public and private sectors in australia.

BACKGROUND: Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) is a proven technology for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but is not reimbursed despite the fact that it is frequently used to defer PCI. METHODS: Costs incurred with use of FFR were compared in both the public and private sectors with the costs that would have been incurred if the technology was not available using consecutive cases over a two year period in a public teaching hospital and its co-located private hospital. RESULTS: FFR was performed on 143 lesions in 120 patients. FFR was < 0.80 in 37 lesions in 34 patients and 25 underwent PCI while 11 had CABG. It was estimated that without FFR 78 lesions in 70 patients would have had PCI with 17 patients having CABG with 35 additional functional tests. Despite a cost of $A1200 per wire, FFR actually saved money. Mean savings in the public sector were $1200 per patient while in the private sector the savings were $5000 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: FFR use saves money for the Federal Government in the public sector and for the Private Health Funds in the private sector. These financial benefits are seen in addition to the improved outcomes seen with this technology.

Fractional flow reserve or optical coherence tomography guidance to revascularize intermediate coronary stenosis using angioplasty (FORZA) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The management of patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions is a major clinical issue. Fractional flow reserve provides validated functional insights while optical coherence tomography provides high resolution anatomic imaging. Both techniques may be applied to guide management in case of angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. Moreover, these techniques may be used to optimize the result of percutaneous coronary intervention. We aim to compare the clinical and economic impact of fractional flow reserve versus optical coherence tomography guidance in patients with angiographically intermediate coronary lesions. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients with at least one angiographically intermediate coronary lesion will be randomized (ratio 1:1) to fractional flow reserve or optical coherence tomography guidance. In the fractional flow reserve arm, percutaneous coronary intervention will be performed if fractional flow reserve value is ≤0.80, and will be conducted with the aim of achieving a post-percutaneous coronary intervention fractional flow reserve target value of ≥0.90. In the optical coherence tomography arm, percutaneous coronary intervention will be performed if percentage of area stenosis (AS%) is ≥75% or 50 to 75% with minimal lumen area <2.5 mm2, or if a major plaque ulceration is detected. In case of percutaneous coronary intervention, optical coherence tomography will guide the procedure in order to minimize under-expansion, malapposition, and edge dissections.Cost load and clinical outcome will be prospectively assessed at one and thirteen months. The assessed clinical outcome measures will be: major cardiovascular events and occurrence of significant angina defined as a Seattle Angina Questionnaire score <90 in the angina frequency scale. DISCUSSION: The FORZA trial will provide useful guidance for the management of patients with coronary artery disease by prospectively assessing the use of two techniques representing the gold standard for functional and anatomical definition of coronary plaques. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01824030.

Comparative cost-effectiveness analyses of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and coronary angiography combined with fractional flow reserve for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: According to recent guidelines, patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) should undergo revascularization if significant myocardial ischemia is present. Both, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) allow for a reliable ischemia assessment and in combination with anatomical information provided by invasive coronary angiography (CXA), such a work-up sets the basis for a decision to revascularize or not. The cost-effectiveness ratio of these two strategies is compared. METHODS: Strategy 1) CMR to assess ischemia followed by CXA in ischemia-positive patients (CMR + CXA), Strategy 2) CXA followed by FFR in angiographically positive stenoses (CXA + FFR). The costs, evaluated from the third party payer perspective in Switzerland, Germany, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), included public prices of the different outpatient procedures and costs induced by procedural complications and by diagnostic errors. The effectiveness criterion was the correct identification of hemodynamically significant coronary lesion(s) (= significant CAD) complemented by full anatomical information. Test performances were derived from the published literature. Cost-effectiveness ratios for both strategies were compared for hypothetical cohorts with different pretest likelihood of significant CAD. RESULTS: CMR + CXA and CXA + FFR were equally cost-effective at a pretest likelihood of CAD of 62% in Switzerland, 65% in Germany, 83% in the UK, and 82% in the US with costs of CHF 5'794, € 1'517, £ 2'680, and $ 2'179 per patient correctly diagnosed. Below these thresholds, CMR + CXA showed lower costs per patient correctly diagnosed than CXA + FFR. CONCLUSIONS: The CMR + CXA strategy is more cost-effective than CXA + FFR below a CAD prevalence of 62%, 65%, 83%, and 82% for the Swiss, the German, the UK, and the US health care systems, respectively. These findings may help to optimize resource utilization in the diagnosis of CAD.

Cost and resource utilization associated with use of computed tomography to evaluate chest pain in the emergency department: the Rule Out Myocardial Infarction using Computer Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT) study.

BACKGROUND: Coronary computed tomographic angiography (cCTA) allows rapid, noninvasive exclusion of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). However, concern exists whether implementation of cCTA in the assessment of patients presenting to the emergency department with acute chest pain will lead to increased downstream testing and costs compared with alternative strategies. Our aim was to compare observed actual costs of usual care (UC) with projected costs of a strategy including early cCTA in the evaluation of patients with acute chest pain in the Rule Out Myocardial Infarction Using Computer Assisted Tomography I (ROMICAT I) study. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared cost and hospital length of stay of UC observed among 368 patients enrolled in the ROMICAT I study with projected costs of management based on cCTA. Costs of UC were determined by an electronic cost accounting system. Notably, UC was not influenced by cCTA results because patients and caregivers were blinded to the cCTA results. Costs after early implementation of cCTA were estimated assuming changes in management based on cCTA findings of the presence and severity of CAD. Sensitivity analysis was used to test the influence of key variables on both outcomes and costs. We determined that in comparison with UC, cCTA-guided triage, whereby patients with no CAD are discharged, could reduce total hospital costs by 23% (P<0.001). However, when the prevalence of obstructive CAD increases, index hospitalization cost increases such that when the prevalence of ≥ 50% stenosis is >28% to 33%, the use of cCTA becomes more costly than UC. CONCLUSIONS: cCTA may be a cost-saving tool in acute chest pain populations that have a prevalence of potentially obstructive CAD <30%. However, increased cost would be anticipated in populations with higher prevalence of disease.

A comparison of Diamond Forrester and coronary calcium scores as gatekeepers for investigations of stable chest pain.

To determine if calcium scores (CS) could act as a more effective gatekeeper than Diamond Forrester (DF) in the assessment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). A sub-study of the Cardiac CT for the Assessment of Chest Pain and Plaque (CAPP) study, a randomised control trial evaluating the cost-effectiveness of cardiac CT in symptomatic patients with stable chest pain. Stable pain was defined as troponin negative pain without symptoms of unstable angina. 250 patients undergoing cardiac CT had both DF scores and CS calculated, with the accuracy of both evaluated against CT coronary angiogram. Criteria given in UK national guidelines were compared. Of the 250 patients, 4 withdrew. 140 (57 %) patients were male. The mean DF was 47.8 and mean CS 172.5. Of the 144 patients with non-anginal pain 19.4 % had significant disease (>50 % stenosis). In general the DF over estimated the presence of CAD whereas the CS reclassified patients to lower risk groups, with 91 in the high risk DF category compared to 26 in the CS. Both receiver operating curve and McNemar Bowker test analysis suggested the DF was less accurate in the prediction of CAD compared to CS [Formula: see text] Projected downstream investigations were also calculated, with the cost per number of significant stenoses identified cheaper with the CS criteria. Patients with suspected stable CAD are more accurately risk stratified by CS compared to the traditional DF. CS was more successful in the prediction of significant stenosis and appears to be more effective at targeting clinical resources to those patients that are in need of them.

Coronary computed tomography and triple rule out CT in patients with acute chest pain and an intermediate cardiac risk for acute coronary syndrome: part 2: economic aspects.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic impact of integrating coronary CT angiography (cCTA) or whole chest "triple-rule-out" CTA (TRO-CTA) in the work-up of patients with acute chest pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 100 consecutive emergency department patients with acute chest pain and an intermediate cardiac risk for ACS underwent cCTA or TRO-CTA (cCTA group). Diagnostic performance, rate and length of hospitalization, hospital costs, hospital reimbursement and hospital profit were analyzed. All findings were compared to those of 100 different patients with acute chest pain that were evaluated with a standard of care (SOC) diagnostic algorithm (SOC group) that did not include cCTA. Diagnostic performance ("safety") of both algorithms was defined as the absence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) over a 90-day follow-up period. RESULTS: In the cCTA group 60/100 patients were safely discharged at the same day. 19/100 patients were hospitalized due to significant coronary stenosis on cCTA, which was confirmed by invasive coronary catheterization (ICC) in 17/19 patients. Relevant non-coronary disease that led to hospitalization were found in 21 patients of the cCTA group. In the SOC group all patients were hospitalized. 87 of these hospitalized patients underwent ICC for exclusion of coronary artery stenosis. A significant coronary artery stenosis was found in only 25 of these patients. Within the cCTA group no patient suffered from MACE over the 90-day follow-up period. In the SOC group 2 patients were rehospitalized during the 90-day follow-up period due to recurrent chest pain and 1 patient because of a pseudoaneurym of the left femoral artery after ICC. The median hospital costs per patient were significantly lower in the cCTA group than in the SOC group (428.9€ vs. 1575.0€, p<0.001). The median reimbursement of the cCTA group was less compared to the SOC group (589.8€ vs. 2412.1€, p<0.001) and patients in the cCTA group gained less profit than patients in the SOC group (57.0€ vs. 448.4€, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Integrating cCTA or TRO-CTA in a SOC algorithm can safely reduce the number of hospitalized patients and reduce total health care costs.

Establishing the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total occlusion in stable angina: a decision-analytic model.

BACKGROUND: In the setting of chronic stable angina, successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of chronic total occlusions (CTO) has been shown to produce significant symptom improvement with some evidence for survival benefit. However, the economic basis for this procedure has not been established compared with optimal medical treatment (OMT) of chronic stable angina. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of CTO-PCI in chronic stable angina using a Markov model. DESIGN: The transition probabilities, utilities and costs related to CTO-PCI and OMT used to inform the model were derived from literature and our experience. Implications with respect to cost and quality of life were calculated. Sensitivity analyses were based on factors noted to influence model outcome. RESULTS: In the reference case, mean age 60 years, rate of successful CTO-PCI 67.9%, and mean transition probabilities, utilities and costs as defined by literature and clinical experience, the strategy of CTO-PCI incurred higher costs relative to OMT (US$31 512 vs US$27 805), but also accumulated greater quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (2.38 vs 1.99), yielding a cost-effectiveness ratio of US$9505 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses showed the utility of OMT and utilities postsuccessful and postunsuccessful CTO-PCI to be the most influential drivers of outcome. Procedural success held limited influence over model outcome at particular utility threshold values. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the supporting evidence, this decision-analytic model suggests that CTO-PCI is cost-effective in a patient population with severe symptoms. Quality-of-life metrics should be employed in future appropriateness criteria developed for CTO-PCI.

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.

ACC/AHA classification of coronary lesions reflects medical resource use in current percutaneous coronary interventions.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between ACC/AHA type classification of coronary lesions and medical resource utilization. BACKGROUND: It is not known whether the classification of coronary lesions by the ACC/AHA system reflects the consumption of medical resources in current percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). METHODS: We identified coronary artery lesions treated with PCI from our PCI database between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2009. Lesions were classified into type A, type B1, type B2, and type C according to the ACC/AHA definition. Total PCI cost, total contrast volume, and total fluoroscopy time were compared among the groups. RESULTS: A total of 447 lesions were analyzed. The number of type A, type B1, type B2, and type C lesion were 75 (16.8%), 98 (21.9%), 145 (32.4%), and 129 (28.9%), respectively. Total PCI cost for type A, type B1, type B2, and type C lesions were $7,262 ± 1,397, $8,126 ± 1,891, $9,126 ± 3,128, and $13,243 ± 4,678, respectively (P < 0.0001). Total contrast volume and fluoroscopy time were also stratified according to the order of type A, type B1, type B2, and type C lesions (P < 0.0001 for total contrast volume; P < 0.0001 for total fluoroscopy time). CONCLUSIONS: Total PCI cost, total contrast volume, and total fluoroscopy time were clearly stratified according to the order of type A, type B1, type B2, and type C lesions. Lesion classification by the ACC/AHA system reflects medical resource use in current PCI.

Additive costs of postoperative complications for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting patients in Virginia.

BACKGROUND: Complications after open-heart surgery result in an increased length of stay and greater financial burdens for all. The purpose of this study was to measure the additive costs of postoperative complications for selected subgroups of patients after coronary artery bypass grafts in the Commonwealth of Virginia. METHODS: A multiyear statewide data repository with clinical and billing data was used to measure outcomes for the period 2004 to 2007. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons records matched with Universal Billing (UB-04) charge data for all payers were used to estimate the additive costs of cardiac surgical outcomes using cost-to-charge ratios. Additive cost was defined as the difference between the baseline cost of an average case with no complications and one with a postoperative morbidity or mortality. Multivariate analysis was used to account for important covariates and apportion incremental costs. RESULTS: The baseline cost of isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) cases with no complications during the study period was $26,056. Isolated atrial fibrillation was the most frequently cited complication and had the lowest additive cost ($2,574). Additive costs for isolated CABG patients were greatest for those cases involving prolonged ventilation ($40,704), renal failure ($49,128), mediastinitis ($62,773), and operative mortality ($49,242). CONCLUSIONS: Additive costs can serve as an indicator for pursuing quality improvement initiatives. Our results suggest additive costs vary according to type of postoperative complication and comorbidities. Regional collaborations of multidisciplinary groups in cardiac surgery are an effective means to implement quality guidelines and drive down additive costs.

Comparison of magnetically navigated and conventional wire percutaneous coronary intervention of a single discrete stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare magnetic guidewire navigation in percutaneous coronary intervention (MPCI) to conventional percutaneous coronary intervention (CPCI) for the elective treatment of a single discrete stenosis. BACKGROUND: Magnetic navigation actively steers an angioplasty wire-tip and may improve PCI procedures, but it is not known whether the intricacy and increased preparation necessary for using the system negatively influences the performance of simple procedures in terms of time and contrast use. METHODS: The procedures of 44 patients (mean age 65 +/- 10 year) undergoing elective single vessel MPCI of a single discrete stenosis were matched for age, gender, and lesion location with 44 concurrent patients (mean age 65 +/- 10 year) undergoing CPCI. The major endpoint was procedural time. RESULTS: Technical success was defined as an intraluminal wire position distal to the stenosis. Procedural outcome, contrast use, and costs were evaluated. Clinical demographics and angiographic characteristics of the two groups were similar, except for a higher incidence of previous MI and class III angina pectoris in the conventional group. The technical success rate was high and identical in both groups (97.7%). Procedural and fluoroscopy times were not significantly different for MPCI compared to CPCI (21.0 +/- 14.5 min vs. 24.7 +/- 14.0 min; 4.9 +/- 4.8 min vs. 7.3 +/- 10.3 min, P = NS). There was a significant reduction in median contrast use [60 ml/patient (41-100) vs. 100 ml/patient (64-130); P = 0.006]. CONCLUSION: Magnetic navigation does not increase procedural time, irradiation, equipment use, or cost compared to conventional PCI of a single discrete stenosis. It proved feasible, yielding high rates of procedural success with less contrast use.