Coronary risk of patients with valvular heart disease: prospective validation of CT-Valve Score.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively validate the CT-Valve score, a new risk score designed to identify patients with valvular heart disease at a low risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) who could benefit from multislice CT (MSCT) first instead of coronary angiography (CAG). METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of patients referred for valve surgery in the Capital Region of Denmark and Odense University Hospital from the 1 February 2015 to the 1 February 2017. MSCT was implemented for patients with a CT-Valve score ≤7 at the referring physician's discretion. Patients with a history of CAD or chronic kidney disease were excluded. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients needing reevaluation with CAG after MSCT and risk of CAD among the patients determined to be low to intermediate risk. RESULTS: In total, 1149 patients were included. The median score was 9 (IQR 3) and 339 (30%) had a score ≤7. MSCT was used for 117 patients. Of these 29 (25%) were reevaluated and 9 (7.7%) had CAD. Of the 222 patients with a score ≤7 that did not receive an MSCT, 14 (6%) had significant CAD. The estimated total cost of evaluation among patients with a score ≤7 before implementation was €132 093 compared with €79 073 after, a 40% reduction. Similarly, estimated total radiation before and after was 608 mSv and 362 mSv, a 41% reduction. Follow-up at a median of 32 months (18-48) showed no ischaemic events for patients receiving only MSCT. CONCLUSION: The CT-Valve score is a valid method for determining risk of CAD among patients with valvular heart disease. Using a score ≤7 as a cut-off for the use of MSCT is safe and cost-effective.

Clinical Evaluation of Onrad, A New Low-cost Version of TomoTherapy that Uses Only Static Beams.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the clinical feasibility of a new low-cost TomoTherapy system (OnradTM) and compared it with low-cost linear accelerator models (linacs). METHODS: Various aspects of treatment and cost were compared between Onrad and linacs for 3-dimensional radiotherapy (3DCRT). Dosimetric comparisons of 10 patients each with breast, stage III lung, prostate, head and neck, and cervical cancers were carried out (total 100 plans). RESULTS: Onrad had advantages in terms of availability of long treatment fields and a smaller mechanical footprint. For breast cancers and lung cancers, target dose homogeneity in Onrad plans was better than that in 3DCRT. In the prostate plans, Onrad plans provided superior D95, conformity and homogeneity. The rectum doses of Onrad plans were lower than those with 3DCRT. Onrad plans provided superior homogeneity and D95 in head and neck cancer. The mean dose and V10-40 Gy of the parotid glands was lower using Onrad. In the cervical cancer plans, target doses were similar with both systems. Normal tissue doses were equal. CONCLUSIONS: Onrad is useful in the clinical setting. Onrad can achieve favorable or comparable dose distributions compared with those of 3DCRT in actual clinical treatment of breast, lung, prostate, head and neck, and cervical cancers.

A cardiac computed tomography first strategy to evaluate chest pain in a rural setting: outcomes and cost implications.

INTRODUCTION: Chest pain continues to be a major burden on the healthcare system with more than eight million patients being evaluated in the emergency department (ED) setting annually at a cost of greater than 10 billion dollars. Missed chest pain diagnoses for ischemia are the leading cause of malpractice lawsuits for ED physicians. The use of cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) to assess acute chest pain was adopted at the Chickasaw Nation Medical Center to attempt to accurately diagnose low to intermediate risk chest pain and potentially reduce the cost of chest pain evaluation to the system while still transferring appropriate high-risk patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients presenting to the ED with low to moderate risk chest pain were evaluated with at least two negative troponin levels, an ECG, and in most instances overnight observation followed by CCTA in the morning if eligible. High-risk patients were transported to a tertiary care facility with cardiac catheterization capabilities. Medical records were checked to determine if any adverse events had occurred during follow-up. Adverse events were defined as myocardial infarction, death, and/or revascularization. Mean follow-up was 28 months. RESULTS: Of the 368 patients studied, 29 patients were transferred due to findings of at least moderate obstructive disease. Of those 29 patients transferred, 11 patients underwent revascularization (10 underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and one underwent coronary artery bypass grafting). The average coronary artery calcium score for patients transferred was 96.1. The average coronary artery calcium score for patients undergoing revascularization was 174.6. Six patients had normal coronary arteries on catheterization. The remaining 12 patients had the moderate obstructive disease by catheterization that was not physiologically significant by either invasive fractional flow reserve or in two instances, negative stress perfusion testing. At 24 months, two patients had undergone revascularization and one patient had died suddenly. CONCLUSION: The cost savings associated with a CCTA first strategy to evaluate chest pain were ~$1 200 244.10. For a self-insured health system such as the Chickasaw Nation, these are very important cost savings.

PET-PANC: multicentre prospective diagnostic accuracy and health economic analysis study of the impact of combined modality 18fluorine-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography scanning in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer diagnosis and staging can be difficult in 10-20% of patients. Positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) adds precise anatomical localisation to functional data. The use of PET/CT may add further value to the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incremental diagnostic accuracy and impact of PET/CT in addition to standard diagnostic work-up in patients with suspected pancreatic cancer. DESIGN: A multicentre prospective diagnostic accuracy and clinical value study of PET/CT in suspected pancreatic malignancy. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with suspected pancreatic malignancy. INTERVENTIONS: All patients to undergo PET/CT following standard diagnostic work-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incremental diagnostic value of PET/CT in addition to standard diagnostic work-up with multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). Secondary outcomes were (1) changes in patients' diagnosis, staging and management as a result of PET/CT; (2) changes in the costs and effectiveness of patient management as a result of PET/CT; (3) the incremental diagnostic value of PET/CT in chronic pancreatitis; (4) the identification of groups of patients who would benefit most from PET/CT; and (5) the incremental diagnostic value of PET/CT in other pancreatic tumours. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2013, 589 patients with suspected pancreatic cancer underwent MDCT and PET/CT, with 550 patients having complete data and in-range PET/CT. Sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer were 88.5% and 70.6%, respectively, for MDCT and 92.7% and 75.8%, respectively, for PET/CT. The maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax.) for a pancreatic cancer diagnosis was 7.5. PET/CT demonstrated a significant improvement in relative sensitivity (p = 0.01) and specificity (p = 0.023) compared with MDCT. Incremental likelihood ratios demonstrated that PET/CT significantly improved diagnostic accuracy in all scenarios (p < 0.0002). PET/CT correctly changed the staging of pancreatic cancer in 56 patients (p = 0.001). PET/CT influenced management in 250 (45%) patients. PET/CT stopped resection in 58 (20%) patients who were due to have surgery. The benefit of PET/CT was limited in patients with chronic pancreatitis or other pancreatic tumours. PET/CT was associated with a gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 0.0157 (95% confidence interval -0.0101 to 0.0430). In the base-case model PET/CT was seen to dominate MDCT alone and is thus highly likely to be cost-effective for the UK NHS. PET/CT was seen to be most cost-effective for the subgroup of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer who were thought to be resectable. CONCLUSION: PET/CT provided a significant incremental diagnostic benefit in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and significantly influenced the staging and management of patients. PET/CT had limited utility in chronic pancreatitis and other pancreatic tumours. PET/CT is likely to be cost-effective at current reimbursement rates for PET/CT to the UK NHS. This was not a randomised controlled trial and therefore we do not have any information from patients who would have undergone MDCT only for comparison. In addition, there were issues in estimating costs for PET/CT. Future work should evaluate the role of PET/CT in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm and prognosis and response to therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer. STUDY REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73852054 and UKCRN 8166. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Charges associated with imaging techniques in evaluation of pediatric hearing loss.

OBJECTIVE: The best imaging study for evaluation of pediatric hearing loss is debated and it is well known magnetic resonance imaging is more costly than computed tomography. The objective of this study is to evaluate charges of computed tomography temporal bone (CTTB) versus magnetic resonance imaging brain, internal auditory canal/cerebellopontine angle (MRI IAC/CPA), with and without sedation in the pediatric population in order to assess to what extent the charges for the procedure are increased. In addition, differences in need for sedation and duration of sedation will be evaluated. METHODS: All patients, 0-18 years that underwent CTTB or MRI IAC/CPA, between January 2013 through December 2014 within department of otolaryngology. RESULTS: 120 CTTBs (118 non-sedated and 2 sedated) and 51 MRI IAC/CPAs (32 non-sedated and 19 sedated) were performed. Average charge for non-sedated CTTB was $1856. CTTB scan under sedation incurred total additional charges of $2385. Average charges for non-sedated MRI IAC/CPA was $3770. Technical charges for sedated MRI IAC/CPA was $151 lower ($2858) but had additional sedation charges of $2256, a recovery room charge of $250, and additional professional fees of $1496 for total charges of $7621. 37% of MRI IAC/CPAs needed sedation to be completed in comparison to 1.6% of CTTB. CONCLUSION: MRI IAC/CPAs are, on average, twice as costly as CTTBs. Almost 40% of patients need sedation to complete MRI IAC/CPA. These considerations may factor into decision making when choosing imaging modality in evaluation of pediatric hearing loss.

Economic Outcomes With Anatomical Versus Functional Diagnostic Testing for Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: PROMISE (PROspective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) found that initial use of at least 64-slice multidetector computed tomography angiography (CTA) versus functional diagnostic testing strategies did not improve clinical outcomes in stable symptomatic patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring noninvasive testing. OBJECTIVE: To conduct an economic analysis for PROMISE (a major secondary aim of the study). DESIGN: Prospective economic study from the U.S. perspective. Comparisons were made according to the intention-to-treat principle, and CIs were calculated using bootstrap methods. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01174550). SETTING: 190 U.S. centers. PATIENTS: 9649 U.S. patients enrolled in PROMISE between July 2010 and September 2013. Median follow-up was 25 months. MEASUREMENTS: Technical costs of the initial (outpatient) testing strategy were estimated from Premier Research Database data. Hospital-based costs were estimated using hospital bills and Medicare cost-charge ratios. Physician fees were taken from the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. Costs were expressed in 2014 U.S. dollars, discounted at 3% annually, and estimated out to 3 years using inverse probability weighting methods. RESULTS: The mean initial testing costs were $174 for exercise electrocardiography; $404 for CTA; $501 to $514 for pharmacologic and exercise stress echocardiography, respectively; and $946 to $1132 for exercise and pharmacologic stress nuclear testing, respectively. Mean costs at 90 days were $2494 for the CTA strategy versus $2240 for the functional strategy (mean difference, $254 [95% CI, -$634 to $906]). The difference was associated with more revascularizations and catheterizations (4.25 per 100 patients) with CTA use. After 90 days, the mean cost difference between the groups out to 3 years remained small. LIMITATION: Cost weights for test strategies were obtained from sources outside PROMISE. CONCLUSION: Computed tomography angiography and functional diagnostic testing strategies in patients with suspected CAD have similar costs through 3 years of follow-up. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Ultra low-dose chest ct with iterative reconstructions as an alternative to conventional chest x-ray prior to heart surgery (CRICKET study): Rationale and design of a multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Stroke after cardiac surgery is a severe complication with a persistently high incidence of 1.4 - 9.7%. Postoperative strokes are mainly embolic and can be provoked by manipulation and clamping of the aorta during cardiac surgery, resulting in the mobilization of atherothrombotic material and calcifications from the aortic wall. Computed tomography (CT) can offer preoperative visualization of aortic calcifications with low radiation exposure. We hypothesize that preoperative knowledge regarding the location and extent of aortic calcifications can be used to optimize surgical strategy and decrease postoperative stroke rate. METHODS/DESIGN: The CRICKET study (ultra low-dose chest CT with iterative reconstructions as an alternative to conventional chest x-ray prior to heart surgery) is a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial to evaluate whether non-contrast chest CT before cardiac surgery can decrease postoperative stroke rate by optimizing surgical strategy. Patients scheduled to undergo cardiac surgery aged 18 years and older are eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria are pregnancy, a chest/cardiac CT in the past three months, emergency surgery, concomitant or prior participation in a study with ionizing radiation and unwillingness to be informed about incidental findings. Subjects (n = 1.724) are randomized between routine care, including a chest x-ray, or routine care with an additional low dose chest CT. The primary objective is to investigate whether the postoperative in-hospital stroke rate is reduced in the CT arm compared to the routine care arm of the randomized trial. The secondary outcome measures are altered surgical approach based on CT findings and cost-effectiveness.

Coronary computed tomography angiography for the assessment of chest pain: current status and future directions.

Chest pain is one of the most common presenting symptoms leading to presentation to medical clinics and Emergency Departments worldwide. Defining the nature and etiology of chest pain can pose a diagnostic dilemma for clinicians, despite the availability of several diagnostic algorithms and guidelines to assist them in evaluating these patients. Most investigations in patients with acute chest pain are initially performed to either exclude or diagnose and manage potentially life-threatening conditions such as acute coronary syndrome, pulmonary embolism and aortic dissection. In cases of stable chest pain syndromes, the focus shifts to determining the presence, extent and severity of coronary artery disease. In recent years, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is being increasingly used worldwide in the assessment of both stable and acute chest pain syndromes. This review evaluates the current evidence regarding the clinical utility of CCTA in the stable and acute chest pain settings and outlines the latest advances in CCTA techniques, including functional assessment of coronary stenoses, and their potential clinical application to improve patient care in a cost-effective manner.

PROspective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of chest pain: rationale and design of the PROMISE trial.

BACKGROUND: Suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the most common, potentially life-threatening diagnostic problems clinicians encounter. However, no large outcome-based randomized trials have been performed to guide the selection of diagnostic strategies for these patients. METHODS: The PROMISE study is a prospective, randomized trial comparing the effectiveness of 2 initial diagnostic strategies in patients with symptoms suspicious for CAD. Patients are randomized to either (1) functional testing (exercise electrocardiogram, stress nuclear imaging, or stress echocardiogram) or (2) anatomical testing with ≥64-slice multidetector coronary computed tomographic angiography. Tests are interpreted locally in real time by subspecialty certified physicians, and all subsequent care decisions are made by the clinical care team. Sites are provided results of central core laboratory quality and completeness assessment. All subjects are followed up for ≥1 year. The primary end point is the time to occurrence of the composite of death, myocardial infarction, major procedural complications (stroke, major bleeding, anaphylaxis, and renal failure), or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: More than 10,000 symptomatic subjects were randomized in 3.2 years at 193 US and Canadian cardiology, radiology, primary care, urgent care, and anesthesiology sites. CONCLUSION: Multispecialty community practice enrollment into a large pragmatic trial of diagnostic testing strategies is both feasible and efficient. The PROMISE trial will compare the clinical effectiveness of an initial strategy of functional testing against an initial strategy of anatomical testing in symptomatic patients with suspected CAD. Quality of life, resource use, cost-effectiveness, and radiation exposure will be assessed.

Current role of cardiac and extra-cardiac pathologies in clinically indicated cardiac computed tomography with emphasis on status before pulmonary vein isolation.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the incidence of cardiac and significant extra-cardiac findings in clinical computed tomography of the heart in patients with atrial fibrillation before pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 224 patients (64 ±â€Š10 years; male 63 %) with atrial fibrillation were examined by cardiac 64-slice multidetector CT before PVI. Extra-cardiac findings were classified as "significant" if they were recommended to additional diagnostics or therapy, and otherwise as "non-significant". Additionally, cardiac findings were documented in detail. RESULTS: A total of 724 cardiac findings were identified in 203 patients (91 % of patients). Additionally, a total of 619 extra-cardiac findings were identified in 179 patients (80 % of patients). Among these extra-cardiac findings 196 (32 %) were "significant", and 423 (68 %) were "non-significant". In 2 patients (1 %) a previously unknown malignancy was detected (esophageal cancer and lung cancer, local stage, no metastasis). 203 additional imaging diagnostics followed to clarify the "significant" findings (124 additional CT, costs 38 314.69 US dollars). Overall, there were 3.2 cardiac and 2.8 extra-cardiac findings per patient. Extra-cardiac findings appear significantly more frequently in patients over 60 years old, in smokers and in patients with a history of cardiac findings (p <0.05). CONCLUSION: Cardiac CT scans before PVI should be screened for extracardiac incidental findings that could have important clinical implications for each patient.

Cost-effectiveness of 64-slice CT angiography compared to conventional coronary angiography based on a coverage with evidence development study in Ontario.

UNLABELLED: Conventional coronary angiography (CCA) is the standard diagnostic for coronary artery disease (CAD), but multi-detector computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) is a non-invasive alternative. METHODS: A multi-center coverage with evidence development study was undertaken and combined with an economic model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of CTCA followed by CCA vs CCA alone. Alternative assumptions were tested in patient scenario and sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: CCA was found to dominate CTCA, however, CTCA was relatively more cost-effective in females, in advancing age, in patients with lower pre-test probabilities of CAD, the higher the sensitivity of CTCA and the lower the probability of undergoing a confirmatory CCA following a positive CTCA. CONCLUSIONS: RESULTS were very sensitive to alternative patient populations and modeling assumptions. Careful consideration of patient characteristics, procedures to improve the diagnostic yield of CTCA and selective use of CCA following CTCA will impact whether CTCA is cost-effective or dominates CCA.

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.

Role of MDCT coronary angiography in the clinical setting: economic implications.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the incremental value and cost-effectiveness ratio of introducing coronary angiography (CA) with multidetector computed tomography (MDCT-CA) in the diagnostic management of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) compared with the traditional diagnostic workup. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Five hundred and fifty consecutive patients who underwent MDCT-CA between January 2009 and June 2011 were considered. Patients with atypical chest pain and suspected obstructive CAD were directed to one of two diagnostic pathways: the traditional protocol (examination, stress test, CA) and the current protocol (examination, stress test, MDCT-CA, and CA, if necessary). The costs of each protocol and for the individual method were calculated. Based on the results, the cost-effectiveness ratio of the two diagnostic pathways was compared. A third, modified, diagnostic pathway has been proposed with its relative cost-effectiveness ratio (examination, MDCT-CA, stress test, and CA, if necessary). RESULTS: Stress test vs. MDCT-CA had an accuracy of 66%, a sensitivity and specificity of 21% and 87%, respectively, and a positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive value of 40% and 70%, respectively. Comparison between conventional CA (CCA) and MDCT-CA showed a sensitivity and specificity of 92% and 89%, respectively, a PPV and NPV of 89%, and an accuracy of 92%. The traditional protocol has higher costs than the second protocol: 1,645 euro against 322 euro (mean), but it shows a better cost-effectiveness ratio. The new proposed protocol has lower costs, mean 261 euro, with a better costeffectiveness ratio than the traditional protocol. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic protocol for patients with suspected CAD has been modified by the introduction of MDCT-CA. Our study confirms the greater diagnostic performance of MDCT-CA compared with stress test and its similar accuracy to CCA. The use of MDCT-CA to select patients for CCA has a favourable cost-effectiveness profile.

Pre-operative CT coronary angiography in patients with mitral valve prolapse referred for surgical repair: comparison of accuracy, radiation dose and cost versus invasive coronary angiography.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study are to evaluate the accuracy of low dose multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography (MDCT) versus invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in ruling out CAD in patients with mitral valve prolapse and severe mitral regurgitation (MVP) before cardiac surgery and to compare the overall effective radiation dose (ED) and cost of a diagnostic approach in which conventional ICA should be performed only in patients with significant CAD as detected by MDCT. METHODS: Eighty patients with MVP and without history of CAD were randomized to MDCT (Group 1) or ICA (Group 2) to rule out CAD before surgery. However, ICA was also performed as gold standard reference in Group 1 to test the diagnostic accuracy of MDCT. A diagnostic work-up A in whom all patients underwent low-dose MDCT as initial diagnostic test and those with positive findings were referred for ICA was compared with work-up B in which all patients were referred for ICA according to the standard of care in terms of ED and cost. RESULTS: The two groups were homogeneous in terms of gender, age and body mass index. The overall feasibility and accuracy in a patient-based model were 99% and 93%, respectively. The overall ED and costs were significantly lower in diagnostic work-up A compared to diagnostic work-up B. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of low dose MDCT for ruling out the presence of significant CAD in patients undergoing elective valve surgery for mitral valve prolapse is excellent with a reduction of overall radiation dose exposure and costs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of 64-slice computed tomography vs. cardiac catheterization to rule out coronary artery disease before non-coronary cardiovascular surgery.

AIMS: To explore the cost-effectiveness of two alternative strategies to rule out significant coronary artery disease (CAD) in the pre-operative evaluation of non-coronary cardiovascular surgery: initial pre-operative coronary 64-slice computed tomography angiography (CCTA) vs. invasive coronary angiography (ICA). METHODS AND RESULTS: These diagnostic strategies are compared from the clinical and payee's perspective, on the basis of the results of four European studies including 490 patients, by an analytic model of a decision tree in terms of the cost-effectiveness as the percentage of catheterizations, complications, and deaths avoided. These studies show that 71.2% of the ICA and 3.56% of the post-ICA complications could have been avoided by an initial pre-operative CCTA with a saving of €411/patient. The sensitivity analysis did not find relevant differences in terms of the cost-effectiveness when we established the indication of ICA vs. CCTA in relation to the amount of coronary calcium and when ICA was always performed by radial access. However, the lack of team experience in CCTA increased the economical and biological cost due to involving an ICA and the exposure to double ionizing radiation sources. CONCLUSION: In experienced groups, the diagnostic strategy with initial pre-operative CCTA is better than the strategy with initial ICA because it is capable of ruling out significant CAD avoiding ICA and post-ICA morbidity-mortality, with an important saving in the cost of the diagnostic process.

Relationship between routine multi-detector cardiac computed tomographic angiography prior to reoperative cardiac surgery, length of stay, and hospital charges.

While multi-detector cardiac computed tomography angiography (MDCCTA) prior to reoperative cardiac surgery (RCS) has been associated with improved clinical outcomes, its impact on hospital charges and length of stay remains unclear. We studied 364 patients undergoing RCS at Washington Hospital Center between 2004 and 2008, including 137 clinically referred for MDCCTA. Baseline demographics, procedural data, and perioperative outcomes were recorded at the time of the procedure. The primary clinical endpoint was the composite of perioperative death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and hemorrhage-related reoperation. Secondary clinical endpoints included surgical procedural variables and the perioperative volume of bleeding and transfusion. Length of stay was determined using the hospital's electronic medical record. Cost data were extracted from the hospital's billing summary. Analysis was performed on individual categories of care, as well as on total hospital charges. Data were compared between subjects with and without MDCCTA, after adjustment for the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. MDCCTA was associated with shorter procedural times, shorter intensive care unit stays, fewer blood transfusions, and less frequent perioperative MI. There was additionally a trend towards a lower incidence of the primary endpoint (17.5 vs. 24.2 %, p = 0.13) primarily due to a lower incidence of perioperative MI (0 vs. 5.7 %, p = 0.002). MDCCTA was also associated with lower median recovery room [$1,325 (1,250-3,302) vs. $3,217 (1,325-5,353) p < 0.001] and nursing charges [$6,335 (3,623-10,478) vs. $6,916 (3,915-14,499) p = 0.03], although operating room charges were higher [$24,100 (22,300-29,700) vs. $23,500 (19,900-27,700) p < 0.05]. Median total charges [$127,000 (95,000-188,000) vs. $123,000 (86,800-226,000) p = 0.77] and length of stay [9 days (6-19) vs. 11 days (7-19), p = 0.21] were similar. Means analysis demonstrated a strong trend towards lower mean total hospital charges [$163,000 (108,426) vs. $192,000 (181,706), p = 0.06] in the MDCCTA group. In conclusion, preoperative MDCCTA is associated with a number of improved perioperative outcomes and does not significantly effect the length of stay or total hospital charges during the index hospitalization.

Cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic angiography before reoperative coronary artery bypass grafting: a decision-analytic model.

BACKGROUND: The risks of repeat thoracotomy can be reduced if thoracic multidetector computed tomographic angiography (CTA) is used to guide preventive surgical strategies (PSS: peripheral cardiopulmonary bypass, circulatory arrest, and non-median sternotomy). We sought to define the cost-effectiveness of CTA using a Markov model. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied outcomes and costs of CTA and non-CTA strategies in a modeled cohort of 10 000 patients undergoing redo coronary artery bypass grafting. Rates of PSS implementation were anticipated to follow identification of risk by CTA. Transitions, costs, and utilities were informed by our experience and the literature. Sensitivity analyses included testing a range of costs of CTA and PSS on model outcome. In the reference case, cost and quality-adjusted life years accrued with the use of CTA ($74 869, 4.63 quality-adjusted life-years) were slightly higher than nonuse ($73 471, 4.59 quality-adjusted life-years), yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $34 950/quality-adjusted life-years. Cost of PSS (equipment and operating time) was the most significant determinant of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. In the reference case (cost of CTA ≈$300), identification and avoidance of potential procedural difficulties with CTA rendered it cost-effective if the cost of PSS was <$12 000. Across a range of CTA costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was not materially influenced by outcomes across a broad range of imputed values. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of CTA appears justified in the setting of isolated reoperative coronary artery bypass grafting, because it aids in appropriate selection of PSS. The cost-effectiveness of this imaging seems more influenced by the costs of subsequent PSS than by the cost of CTA.

An evidence-based guide for coronary calcium scoring in asymptomatic patients without coronary heart disease.

As public awareness and clinical use of CAC screening increases, physicians should, at a minimum, know the following information: 1) The presence of CAC indicates underlying CHD but does not predict luminal obstruction. 2) Non-contrast, prospectively ECG-gated cardiac EBCT and MDCT are sensitive, reproducible, rapid, and essentially equivalent imaging techniques commonly used to screen for CAC. 3) Currently, CAC screening is appropriate for all intermediate- risk patients and low-risk patients with a family history of premature CHD, and might be appropriate for all low-risk women. 4) The risks associated with CAC screening are a small but measurable excess risk of cancer and the risk of unnecessary downstream tests and procedures. 5) A CAC score of zero has a very high negative predictive value for CHD events. 6) Increasingly positive (non-zero) CAC scores are directly proportional to increased CHD event risk, and a CAC score >100 or greater than the 75th percentile indicates high risk. 7) Repeat screening to determine CAC progression or regression is not currently recommended.