@article{DorenkampBonaventuraSohnsetal.2012,
  author    = {Dorenkamp, Marc and Bonaventura, Klaus and Sohns, Christian and Becker, Christoph R. and Leber, Alexander W.},
  title     = {Direct costs and cost-effectiveness of dual-source computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease},
  series = {Heart},
  volume    = {98},
  journal   = {Heart},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {BMJ Publ. Group},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1355-6037},
  doi       = {10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300149},
  pages     = {460 -- 467},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Aims The study aims to determine the direct costs and comparative cost-effectiveness of latest-generation dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) and invasive coronary angiography for diagnosing coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients suspected of having this disease. Methods The study was based on a previously elaborated cohort with an intermediate pretest likelihood for CAD and on complementary clinical data. Cost calculations were based on a detailed analysis of direct costs, and generally accepted accounting principles were applied. Based on Bayes' theorem, a mathematical model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of both diagnostic approaches. Total costs included direct costs, induced costs and costs of complications. Effectiveness was defined as the ability of a diagnostic test to accurately identify a patient with CAD. Results Direct costs amounted to (sic)98.60 for DSCT and to (sic)317.75 for invasive coronary angiography. Analysis of model calculations indicated that cost-effectiveness grew hyperbolically with increasing prevalence of CAD. Given the prevalence of CAD in the study cohort (24\%), DSCT was found to be more cost-effective than invasive coronary angiography ((sic)970 vs (sic)1354 for one patient correctly diagnosed as having CAD). At a disease prevalence of 49\%, DSCT and invasive angiography were equally effective with costs of (sic)633. Above a threshold value of disease prevalence of 55\%, proceeding directly to invasive coronary angiography was more cost-effective than DSCT. Conclusions With proper patient selection and consideration of disease prevalence, DSCT coronary angiography is cost-effective for diagnosing CAD in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for it. However, the range of eligible patients may be smaller than previously reported.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{BonaventuraSonntagKleber2011,
  author    = {Bonaventura, Klaus and Sonntag, Steffen and Kleber, Franz Xayer},
  title     = {Incidence of acute thrombosis after percutaneous coronary intervention with paclitaxel eluting balloons in a clinical setting and in clinical trials},
  series = {Journal of the American College of Cardiology},
  volume    = {58},
  booktitle = {Journal of the American College of Cardiology},
  number    = {20},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0735-1097},
  pages     = {B78 -- B78},
  year      = {2011},
  language  = {en}
}