• search hit 5 of 11
Back to Result List

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

  • 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 withAims 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.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author:Marc Dorenkamp, Klaus Bonaventura, Christian Sohns, Christoph R. Becker, Alexander W. Leber
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300149
ISSN:1355-6037 (print)
Parent Title (English):Heart
Publisher:BMJ Publ. Group
Place of publication:London
Document Type:Article
Language:English
Year of first Publication:2012
Year of Completion:2012
Release Date:2017/03/26
Volume:98
Issue:6
Pagenumber:8
First Page:460
Last Page:467
Funder:Siemens Healthcare
Organizational units:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Ernährungswissenschaft
Peer Review:Referiert