Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Konkret geht es um den Diabetes-Patienten mit kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen oder Risiken, die Herzinsuffizienz sowie die kardiovaskuläre Primär- und Sekundärprävention. Sind Sie hier schon auf dem neuesten Stand? Unsere Experten beleuchten, wo und warum das bisherige Procedere geändert werden soll und was in der Praxis sinnvoll ist. Holen Sie sich Ihr Update und 2 CME-Punkte beim MMW-Webinar am 24. April von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. 
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports
Erschienen in: Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports 5/2012

01.10.2012 | Cardiac Computed Tomography (TC Villines and S Achenbach, Section Editors)

Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: Costs and Current Reimbursement Status

verfasst von: Edward Hulten, Rosco Gore, Marcio Sommer Bittencourt, Michael K. Cheezum, Todd C. Villines

Erschienen in: Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports | Ausgabe 5/2012

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has evolved as the most sensitive diagnostic non-invasive test for diagnosing coronary artery disease (CAD). Outcomes data is accumulating and demonstrating that CCTA has excellent prognostic value. Given CCTA’s consistently proven accuracy and improved safety related to radiation sparing techniques, public health officials have called for comparative cost-effectiveness research of CCTA vs other diagnostic testing strategies for assessing possible angina in symptomatic patients. In this article, we review the available cost studies of CCTA in comparison with other diagnostic strategies. Currently available data are limited but include 5 completed randomized trials, 11 observational studies, 7 studies using theoretical mathematical modeling, and 4 reports of the cost impact of incidental findings on CCTA. Additional randomized trials including cost considerations are ongoing, but evidence from available randomized, observational, and theoretical modeling data mostly support CCTA as a potentially cost-saving, non-invasive test for the evaluation of CAD in symptomatic patients.
Literatur
1.
Moshage WE, Achenbach S, Seese B, Bachmann K, Kirchgeorg M. Coronary artery stenoses: three-dimensional imaging with electrocardiographically triggered, contrast agent-enhanced, electron-beam CT. Radiology. 1995;196:707–14.PubMed
2.
Schuetz GM, Zacharopoulou NM, Schlattmann P, Dewey M. Meta-analysis: noninvasive coronary angiography using computed tomography vs magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:167–77.PubMed
3.
Weustink AC, Mollet NR, Neefjes LA, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of noninvasive testing for coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:630–9.PubMed
4.
Mark DB, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT 2010 expert consensus document on coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the American college of cardiology foundation task force on expert consensus documents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2663–99.PubMedCrossRef
5.
•• Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography: a report of the American college of cardiology foundation appropriate use criteria task force, the society of cardiovascular computed tomography, the american college of radiology, the American Heart Association, the american society of echocardiography, the american society of nuclear cardiology, the north american society for cardiovascular imaging, the society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions, and the society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1864–94. Currently accepted appropriate use Guidelines for coronary CT angiography.PubMedCrossRef
6.
•• Abbara S, Arbab-Zadeh A, Callister TQ, et al. SCCT guidelines for performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the society of cardiovascular computed tomography guidelines committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:190–204. Technical standards for performance of coronary CT angiography.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Raff GL, Abidov A, Achenbach S, et al. SCCT guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of coronary computed tomographic angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:122–36.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Achenbach S, Marwan M, Ropers D, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 mSv using prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:340–6.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Bischoff B, Hein F, Meyer T, et al. Comparison of sequential and helical scanning for radiation dose and image quality: results of the prospective multicenter study on radiation dose estimates of cardiac CT angiography (PROTECTION) I study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:1495–9.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Chow BJ, Small G, Yam Y, et al. Incremental prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography in coronary artery disease using CONFIRM: coronary computed tomography angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: an international multicenter registry. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:463–72.PubMedCrossRef
11.
• Hulten EA, Carbonaro S, Petrillo SP, Mitchell JD, Villines TC. Prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1237–47. Established that negative CTA has an excellent prognosis, while <50 % worst stenosis has a slightly increased risk of future death, MI, and revascularization. Those with >50 % stenosis had the worst prognosis.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Metz LD, Beattie M, Hom R, Redberg RF, Grady D, Fleischmann KE. The prognostic value of normal exercise myocardial perfusion imaging and exercise echocardiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:227–37.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Bonow RO. 2009 ASNC keynote lecture: measuring cost, cost-effectiveness, and quality in cardiovascular imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:362–9.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Douglas PS, Taylor A, Bild D, et al. Outcomes research in cardiovascular imaging: report of a workshop sponsored by the national heart, lung, and blood institute. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:339–48.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al. ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-Elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task force on practice guidelines (writing committee to revise the 2002 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction) developed in collaboration with the american college of emergency physicians, the society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions, and the society of thoracic surgeons endorsed by the american association of cardiovascular and pulmonary rehabilitation and the society for academic emergency medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:e1–e157.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Fraker Jr TD, Fihn SD, Gibbons RJ, et al. 2007 chronic angina focused update of the ACC/AHA 2002 guidelines for the management of patients with chronic stable angina: a report of the American College Of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines writing group to develop the focused update of the 2002 guidelines for the management of patients with chronic stable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:2264–74.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, van Tulder M, Ament A. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: consensus on health economic criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:240–5.PubMed
18.
Soto J. Health economic evaluations using decision analytic modeling. principles and practices–utilization of a checklist to their development and appraisal. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2002;18:94–111.PubMed
19.
• Goldstein JA, Chinnaiyan KM, Abidov A, et al. The CT-STAT (coronary computed tomographic angiography for systematic triage of acute chest pain patients to treatment) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1414–22. The first multi-center randomized controlled trial of coronary CT angiography for triage of possible acute coronary syndrome in the Emergency Room. CT angiography compared with standard of care reduced cost and time to diagnosis, with no difference in safety.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Goldstein JA, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, Ross MA, O’Neil BJ, Raff GL. A randomized controlled trial of multi-slice coronary computed tomography for evaluation of acute chest pain. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:863–71.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Litt HI, Gatsonis C, Snyder B, et al. CT angiography for safe discharge of patients with possible acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1393–403.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Miller AH, Pepe PE, Peshock R, et al. Is coronary computed tomography angiography a resource sparing strategy in the risk stratification and evaluation of acute chest pain? Results of a randomized controlled trial. Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18:458–67.PubMedCrossRef
23.
May JM, Shuman WP, Strote JN, et al. Low-risk patients with chest pain in the emergency department: negative 64-MDCT coronary angiography may reduce length of stay and hospital charges. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:150–4.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Min JK, Kang N, Shaw LJ, et al. Costs and clinical outcomes after coronary multidetector CT angiography in patients without known coronary artery disease: comparison to myocardial perfusion SPECT. Radiology. 2008;249:62–70.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Min JK, Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Gilmore A, Kang N. Costs and clinical outcomes in individuals without known coronary artery disease undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography from an analysis of Medicare category III transaction codes. Am J Cardiol. 2008;102:672–8.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Budoff MJ, Gopal A, Gul KM, Mao SS, Fischer H, Oudiz RJ. Prevalence of obstructive coronary artery disease in an outpatient cardiac CT angiography environment. Int J Cardiol. 2008;129:32–6.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Chang AM, Shofer FS, Weiner MG, et al. Actual financial comparison of 4 strategies to evaluate patients with potential acute coronary syndromes. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15:649–55.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Kelly D, Cole S, Rossiter F, Mallinson K, Smith A, Simpson I. Implementation of the new NICE guidelines for stable chest pain: likely impact on chest pain services in the UK. Br J Cardiol. 2011;18:185–8.
29.
Menon M, Lesser JR, Hara H, et al. Multidetector CT coronary angiography for patient triage to invasive coronary angiography: performance and cost in ambulatory patients with equivocal or suspected inaccurate noninvasive stress tests. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;73:497–502.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Patel N, Pal RS, Flores F, Budoff M. Utility of cardiac computed tomography angiography to exclude clinically significant obstructive coronary artery disease in patients after myocardial perfusion imaging. Am J Cardiol. 2011;109:165–8.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Patterson C, Nicol E, Bryan L, et al. The effect of applying NICE guidelines for the investigation of stable chest pain on out-patient cardiac services in the UK. QJM. 2011;104:581–8.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Shreibati JB, Baker LC, Hlatky MA. Association of coronary CT angiography or stress testing with subsequent utilization and spending among medicare beneficiaries. JAMA. 2011;306:2128–36.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Cheezum MK, Hulten EA, Taylor AJ, et al. Cardiac CT angiography compared with myocardial perfusion stress testing on downstream resource utilization. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5:101–9.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Takakuwa KM, Halpern EJ, Shofer FS. A time and imaging cost analysis of low-risk ED observation patients: a conservative 64-section computed tomography coronary angiography “triple rule-out” compared to nuclear stress test strategy. Am J Emerg Med. 2011;29:187–95.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Bendix K, Jensen JM, Poulsen S, Mygind N, Norgaard BL. Coronary dual source multi detector computed tomography in patients suspected of coronary artery disease: prevalence of incidental extra-cardiac findings. Eur J Radiol. 2011;80:109–14.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Lee CI, Tsai EB, Sigal BM, Plevritis SK, Garber AM, Rubin GD. Incidental extracardiac findings at coronary CT: clinical and economic impact. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:1531–8.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Machaalany J, Yam Y, Ruddy TD, et al. Potential clinical and economic consequences of noncardiac incidental findings on cardiac computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:1533–41.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Khare RK, Courtney DM, Powell ES, Venkatesh AK, Lee TA. Sixty-four-slice computed tomography of the coronary arteries: cost-effectiveness analysis of patients presenting to the emergency department with low-risk chest pain. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15:623–32.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Ladapo JA, Jaffer FA, Hoffmann U, et al. Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of coronary computed tomography angiography in the evaluation of patients with chest pain. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:2409–22.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Min JK, Gilmore A, Budoff MJ, Berman DS, O’Day K. Cost-effectiveness of coronary CT angiography vs myocardial perfusion SPECT for evaluation of patients with chest pain and no known coronary artery disease. Radiology. 254:801–8.
41.
Branch KR, Bresnahan BW, Veenstra DL, et al. Economic outcome of cardiac CT-based evaluation and standard of care for suspected acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department: a decision analytic model. Acad Radiol. 2012;19:265–73.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Genders TS, Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, et al. CT coronary angiography in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease: decision making from various perspectives in the face of uncertainty. Radiology. 2009;253:734–44.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Goehler A, Ollendorf DA, Jaeger M, et al. A simulation model of clinical and economic outcomes of cardiac CT triage of patients with acute chest pain in the emergency department. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:853–61.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Ladapo JA, Hoffmann U, Bamberg F, et al. Cost-effectiveness of coronary MDCT in the triage of patients with acute chest pain. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:455–63.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Hoffmann U, Truong QA, Fleg JL, et al. Design of the rule out myocardial ischemia/infarction using computer assisted tomography: a multicenter randomized comparative effectiveness trial of cardiac computed tomography vs alternative triage strategies in patients with acute chest pain in the emergency department. Am Heart J. 2012;163:330–8:8 e1.
46.
Hoffmann U, Truong QA, Lee H, et al. ROMICAT II - rule out myocardial ischemia/infarction using computer assisted tomography. NHLBI UO1HL092040. a multicenter randomized comparative effectiveness trial of cardiac CTA vs standard evaluation in acute chest pain patients in the emergency department. In: American College of Cardiology Annual Scientific Session - Late Breaking Clinical Trials; 2012; Chicago, IL; 2012.
47.
Blankstein R, Hoffmann U. Evaluation for coronary artery disease and medicare spending. JAMA. 2012;307:911–2.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Stergiopoulos K, Brown DL. Initial coronary stent implantation with medical therapy vs medical therapy alone for stable coronary artery disease: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:312–9.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Hoffmann U, Nagurney JT, Moselewski F, et al. Coronary multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of patients with acute chest pain. Circulation. 2006;114:2251–60.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Rubinshtein R, Halon DA, Gaspar T, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice cardiac computed tomographic angiography for diagnosing acute coronary syndromes and predicting clinical outcome in emergency department patients with chest pain of uncertain origin. Circulation. 2007;115:1762–8.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Horton KM, Post WS, Blumenthal RS, Fishman EK. Prevalence of significant noncardiac findings on electron-beam computed tomography coronary artery calcium screening examinations. Circulation. 2002;106:532–4.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Onuma Y, Tanabe K, Nakazawa G, et al. Noncardiac findings in cardiac imaging with multidetector computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:402–6.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Dewey M, Schnapauff D, Teige F, Hamm B. Non-cardiac findings on coronary computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:2038–43.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Mueller J, Jeudy J, Poston R, White CS. Cardiac CT angiography after coronary bypass surgery: prevalence of incidental findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:414–9.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Haller S, Kaiser C, Buser P, Bongartz G, Bremerich J. Coronary artery imaging with contrast-enhanced MDCT: extracardiac findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187:105–10.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Illes J, Kirschen MP, Edwards E, et al. Ethics. Incidental findings in brain imaging research. Science. 2006;311:783–4.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Stone JH. Incidentalomas–clinical correlation and translational science required. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:2748–9.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Shen M, Saxena N, Thomas GS. Indications and reimbursement of cardiac computed tomography angiography: history, present, and future perspectives. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2008;2:3–11.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Bonow RO. ASNC keynote lecture: measuring cost, cost-effectiveness, and quality in cardiovascular imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;17:362–9.CrossRef
60.
• Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (assessment by coronary computed tomographic angiography of individuals undergoing invasive coronary angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1724–32. This multi-center diagnostic accuracy trial of coronary CT angiography established that the sensitivity is comparable to invasive angiography.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Lorell BH, et al. ACC/AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging–executive summary: a report of the american college of cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASNC committee to revise the 1995 guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:1318–33.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Gibbons RJ, Balady GJ, Bricker JT, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for exercise testing: summary article. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines (committee to update the 1997 exercise testing guidelines). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1531–40.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Hulten EA, Bittencourt MS, Ghoshhajra B, Blankstein R. Stress CT perfusion: coupling coronary anatomy with physiology. J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;published online ahead of print Mar 2012.
64.
Levsky JM, Travin MI, Spevack DM, et al. Rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial comparing stress myocardial perfusion imaging with coronary CT angiography as the initial imaging study for intermediate-risk patients admitted with chest pain. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:264–71.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Douglas PS, Taylor A, Bild D, et al. Outcomes research in cardiovascular imaging: report of a workshop sponsored by the national heart, lung, and blood institute. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:897–907.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: Costs and Current Reimbursement Status
verfasst von
Edward Hulten
Rosco Gore
Marcio Sommer Bittencourt
Michael K. Cheezum
Todd C. Villines
Publikationsdatum
01.10.2012
Verlag
Current Science Inc.
Erschienen in
Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports / Ausgabe 5/2012
Print ISSN: 1941-9066
Elektronische ISSN: 1941-9074
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-012-9158-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2012

Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports 5/2012 Zur Ausgabe

Cardiac Computed Tomography (TC Villines and S Achenbach, Section Editors)

CT Quantification of Epicardial Fat: Implications for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment

Cardiac Computed Tomography (TC Villines and S Achenbach, Section Editors)

Cardiac CT for Pre-Procedural Electrophysiologic Study Planning

Cardiac Computed Tomography (TC Villines and S Achenbach, Section Editors)

Cardiac CT in Valvular Heart Disease: Current State-of-the-Art

Cardiac Computed Tomography (TC Villines and S Achenbach, Section Editors)

Characteristics of High-Risk Plaques as Identified on Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography

Cardiac Computed Tomography (TC Villines and S Achenbach, Section Editors)

Current and Future Post-Processing and Reconstruction Methods for Improved Image Quality in Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography

Cardiac Computed Tomography (TC Villines and S Achenbach, Section Editors)

Integrating Physiologic and Anatomic Assessment of Coronary Artery Disease by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography

Neu im Fachgebiet Kardiologie

23.04.2024 | Ablationstherapie | Nachrichten

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 | Prävention und Rehabilitation in der Kardiologie | Nachrichten

Europäische Ernährungsgewohnheiten: Das sind die häufigsten Fehler

19.04.2024 | Vorhofflimmern | Nachrichten

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

18.04.2024 | Arterielle Hypertonie | Nachrichten

Antihypertensiva schützen auch alte Menschen noch vor Demenz
weitere anzeigen

Update Kardiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen