Loading…

Cardiac CT angiography compared with myocardial perfusion stress testing on downstream resource utilization

Background Nuclear myocardial perfusion stress (MPS) testing and cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) are commonly used noninvasive tests. Limited studies exist comparing their clinical and cost outcomes. Objectives We compared the clinical and cost outcomes of MPS with CCTA in a symptoma...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography 2011-03, Vol.5 (2), p.101-109
Main Authors: Cheezum, Michael K., MD, Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH, Taylor, Allen J., MD, Gibbs, Barnett T., MD, Hinds, Sidney R., MD, Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD, Stack, Aaron L., MD, Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-20b8f454560b006add972190ee02304076172a9208fa4c456352d295eddf20fb3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-20b8f454560b006add972190ee02304076172a9208fa4c456352d295eddf20fb3
container_end_page 109
container_issue 2
container_start_page 101
container_title Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography
container_volume 5
creator Cheezum, Michael K., MD
Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH
Taylor, Allen J., MD
Gibbs, Barnett T., MD
Hinds, Sidney R., MD
Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD
Stack, Aaron L., MD
Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT
description Background Nuclear myocardial perfusion stress (MPS) testing and cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) are commonly used noninvasive tests. Limited studies exist comparing their clinical and cost outcomes. Objectives We compared the clinical and cost outcomes of MPS with CCTA in a symptomatic cohort. Methods We retrospectively identified 241 symptomatic patients without known coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent MPS between May 2006 and April 2008. A comparison group of 252 age- and sex-matched symptomatic patients without known CAD underwent 64-slice CCTA during the same period. The primary outcome was the per-patient rate of posttest clinical evaluations and cardiac testing for the presenting symptom. Total direct costs were also compared. Results The group consisted of 44% women of mean age 53 ± 10 years. There were no differences in risk factors or pretest probability of obstructive CAD (83% intermediate risk) between groups. During mean follow-up of 30 ± 7 months, we found no difference between CCTA and MPS in per-patient rates of any posttest evaluation or testing, 24.6% versus 27.7% ( P = 0.44), respectively. CCTA patients had lower utilization of invasive angiography (3.3% vs 8.1%; P = 0.02) and a nonsignificant trend toward reduced downstream cardiac testing (11.5% vs 17.0%; P = 0.08). Including the evaluation of significant incidental findings (7.1% in CCTA), mean direct costs were significantly lower using CCTA ($808; 95% CI, $611–$1005) compared with MPS ($1315; 95% CI, $1105–$1525; P
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jcct.2010.11.005
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_861592888</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1934592510005629</els_id><sourcerecordid>861592888</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-20b8f454560b006add972190ee02304076172a9208fa4c456352d295eddf20fb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1q3DAUhUVpyF_zAl0E7bry9Er-h1AoQ5MWAlkkhe6ERrqeyLEtR7Ibpk-f607SRRdZSVx95yB9YuyjgJUAUXxuV60x00rCMhArgPwdOxZVWSRVIX69p32dZkley_yIncTYElAKqA7ZkRQyLwTIY_aw1sE6bfj6juth6_w26PF-x43vRx3Q8ic33fN-581fruMjhmaOzg88TgFj5BPGyQ1bThPrn4ZlqntOR34OBvk8uc790RMlPrCDRncRz17WU_bz8tvd-ntyfXP1Y_31OjGZgCmRsKmaLM_yAjYAhba2LqWoARFkChmUhSilriVUjc4MYWkuraxztLaR0GzSU_Zp3zsG_zjT9VTvosGu0wP6OSqyQ1KqqiJS7kkTfIwBGzUG1-uwUwLU4li1anGsFsdKCEUKKXT-Uj9verT_Iq9SCbjYA0iP_O0wqGgcDgatC0hl1ru3-7_8FzedG5zR3QPuMLbkdSB9SqgoFajb5ZeXTxZA6ULW6TPV5aN7</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>861592888</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cardiac CT angiography compared with myocardial perfusion stress testing on downstream resource utilization</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><creator>Cheezum, Michael K., MD ; Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH ; Taylor, Allen J., MD ; Gibbs, Barnett T., MD ; Hinds, Sidney R., MD ; Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD ; Stack, Aaron L., MD ; Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT</creator><creatorcontrib>Cheezum, Michael K., MD ; Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH ; Taylor, Allen J., MD ; Gibbs, Barnett T., MD ; Hinds, Sidney R., MD ; Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD ; Stack, Aaron L., MD ; Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT</creatorcontrib><description>Background Nuclear myocardial perfusion stress (MPS) testing and cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) are commonly used noninvasive tests. Limited studies exist comparing their clinical and cost outcomes. Objectives We compared the clinical and cost outcomes of MPS with CCTA in a symptomatic cohort. Methods We retrospectively identified 241 symptomatic patients without known coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent MPS between May 2006 and April 2008. A comparison group of 252 age- and sex-matched symptomatic patients without known CAD underwent 64-slice CCTA during the same period. The primary outcome was the per-patient rate of posttest clinical evaluations and cardiac testing for the presenting symptom. Total direct costs were also compared. Results The group consisted of 44% women of mean age 53 ± 10 years. There were no differences in risk factors or pretest probability of obstructive CAD (83% intermediate risk) between groups. During mean follow-up of 30 ± 7 months, we found no difference between CCTA and MPS in per-patient rates of any posttest evaluation or testing, 24.6% versus 27.7% ( P = 0.44), respectively. CCTA patients had lower utilization of invasive angiography (3.3% vs 8.1%; P = 0.02) and a nonsignificant trend toward reduced downstream cardiac testing (11.5% vs 17.0%; P = 0.08). Including the evaluation of significant incidental findings (7.1% in CCTA), mean direct costs were significantly lower using CCTA ($808; 95% CI, $611–$1005) compared with MPS ($1315; 95% CI, $1105–$1525; P &lt;0.001). Conclusions Low-intermediate risk patients without known CAD who underwent CCTA, compared with MPS, had similar rates of posttest evaluations, fewer invasive catheterizations, and lower overall evaluation costs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1934-5925</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1876-861X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2010.11.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21256102</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Analysis of Variance ; Cardiac computed tomography ; Cardiovascular ; Case-Control Studies ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Coronary Angiography - economics ; Coronary Angiography - methods ; Coronary artery disease ; Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Myocardial perfusion stress ; Radiopharmaceuticals ; Resource utilization ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Single photon emission computed tomography ; Statistics, Nonparametric ; Technetium Tc 99m Sestamibi ; Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon - economics ; Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon - methods ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - economics ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography, 2011-03, Vol.5 (2), p.101-109</ispartof><rights>2011</rights><rights>Published by Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-20b8f454560b006add972190ee02304076172a9208fa4c456352d295eddf20fb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-20b8f454560b006add972190ee02304076172a9208fa4c456352d295eddf20fb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21256102$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cheezum, Michael K., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taylor, Allen J., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibbs, Barnett T., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hinds, Sidney R., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stack, Aaron L., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT</creatorcontrib><title>Cardiac CT angiography compared with myocardial perfusion stress testing on downstream resource utilization</title><title>Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography</title><addtitle>J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr</addtitle><description>Background Nuclear myocardial perfusion stress (MPS) testing and cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) are commonly used noninvasive tests. Limited studies exist comparing their clinical and cost outcomes. Objectives We compared the clinical and cost outcomes of MPS with CCTA in a symptomatic cohort. Methods We retrospectively identified 241 symptomatic patients without known coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent MPS between May 2006 and April 2008. A comparison group of 252 age- and sex-matched symptomatic patients without known CAD underwent 64-slice CCTA during the same period. The primary outcome was the per-patient rate of posttest clinical evaluations and cardiac testing for the presenting symptom. Total direct costs were also compared. Results The group consisted of 44% women of mean age 53 ± 10 years. There were no differences in risk factors or pretest probability of obstructive CAD (83% intermediate risk) between groups. During mean follow-up of 30 ± 7 months, we found no difference between CCTA and MPS in per-patient rates of any posttest evaluation or testing, 24.6% versus 27.7% ( P = 0.44), respectively. CCTA patients had lower utilization of invasive angiography (3.3% vs 8.1%; P = 0.02) and a nonsignificant trend toward reduced downstream cardiac testing (11.5% vs 17.0%; P = 0.08). Including the evaluation of significant incidental findings (7.1% in CCTA), mean direct costs were significantly lower using CCTA ($808; 95% CI, $611–$1005) compared with MPS ($1315; 95% CI, $1105–$1525; P &lt;0.001). Conclusions Low-intermediate risk patients without known CAD who underwent CCTA, compared with MPS, had similar rates of posttest evaluations, fewer invasive catheterizations, and lower overall evaluation costs.</description><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Cardiac computed tomography</subject><subject>Cardiovascular</subject><subject>Case-Control Studies</subject><subject>Chi-Square Distribution</subject><subject>Coronary Angiography - economics</subject><subject>Coronary Angiography - methods</subject><subject>Coronary artery disease</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Myocardial perfusion stress</subject><subject>Radiopharmaceuticals</subject><subject>Resource utilization</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Single photon emission computed tomography</subject><subject>Statistics, Nonparametric</subject><subject>Technetium Tc 99m Sestamibi</subject><subject>Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon - economics</subject><subject>Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon - methods</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - economics</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><issn>1934-5925</issn><issn>1876-861X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc1q3DAUhUVpyF_zAl0E7bry9Er-h1AoQ5MWAlkkhe6ERrqeyLEtR7Ibpk-f607SRRdZSVx95yB9YuyjgJUAUXxuV60x00rCMhArgPwdOxZVWSRVIX69p32dZkley_yIncTYElAKqA7ZkRQyLwTIY_aw1sE6bfj6juth6_w26PF-x43vRx3Q8ic33fN-581fruMjhmaOzg88TgFj5BPGyQ1bThPrn4ZlqntOR34OBvk8uc790RMlPrCDRncRz17WU_bz8tvd-ntyfXP1Y_31OjGZgCmRsKmaLM_yAjYAhba2LqWoARFkChmUhSilriVUjc4MYWkuraxztLaR0GzSU_Zp3zsG_zjT9VTvosGu0wP6OSqyQ1KqqiJS7kkTfIwBGzUG1-uwUwLU4li1anGsFsdKCEUKKXT-Uj9verT_Iq9SCbjYA0iP_O0wqGgcDgatC0hl1ru3-7_8FzedG5zR3QPuMLbkdSB9SqgoFajb5ZeXTxZA6ULW6TPV5aN7</recordid><startdate>20110301</startdate><enddate>20110301</enddate><creator>Cheezum, Michael K., MD</creator><creator>Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH</creator><creator>Taylor, Allen J., MD</creator><creator>Gibbs, Barnett T., MD</creator><creator>Hinds, Sidney R., MD</creator><creator>Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD</creator><creator>Stack, Aaron L., MD</creator><creator>Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110301</creationdate><title>Cardiac CT angiography compared with myocardial perfusion stress testing on downstream resource utilization</title><author>Cheezum, Michael K., MD ; Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH ; Taylor, Allen J., MD ; Gibbs, Barnett T., MD ; Hinds, Sidney R., MD ; Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD ; Stack, Aaron L., MD ; Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-20b8f454560b006add972190ee02304076172a9208fa4c456352d295eddf20fb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Cardiac computed tomography</topic><topic>Cardiovascular</topic><topic>Case-Control Studies</topic><topic>Chi-Square Distribution</topic><topic>Coronary Angiography - economics</topic><topic>Coronary Angiography - methods</topic><topic>Coronary artery disease</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Myocardial perfusion stress</topic><topic>Radiopharmaceuticals</topic><topic>Resource utilization</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Single photon emission computed tomography</topic><topic>Statistics, Nonparametric</topic><topic>Technetium Tc 99m Sestamibi</topic><topic>Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon - economics</topic><topic>Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon - methods</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - economics</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cheezum, Michael K., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taylor, Allen J., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibbs, Barnett T., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hinds, Sidney R., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stack, Aaron L., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cheezum, Michael K., MD</au><au>Hulten, Edward A., MD, MPH</au><au>Taylor, Allen J., MD</au><au>Gibbs, Barnett T., MD</au><au>Hinds, Sidney R., MD</au><au>Feuerstein, Irwin M., MD</au><au>Stack, Aaron L., MD</au><au>Villines, Todd C., MD, FSCCT</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cardiac CT angiography compared with myocardial perfusion stress testing on downstream resource utilization</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography</jtitle><addtitle>J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr</addtitle><date>2011-03-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>101</spage><epage>109</epage><pages>101-109</pages><issn>1934-5925</issn><eissn>1876-861X</eissn><abstract>Background Nuclear myocardial perfusion stress (MPS) testing and cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) are commonly used noninvasive tests. Limited studies exist comparing their clinical and cost outcomes. Objectives We compared the clinical and cost outcomes of MPS with CCTA in a symptomatic cohort. Methods We retrospectively identified 241 symptomatic patients without known coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent MPS between May 2006 and April 2008. A comparison group of 252 age- and sex-matched symptomatic patients without known CAD underwent 64-slice CCTA during the same period. The primary outcome was the per-patient rate of posttest clinical evaluations and cardiac testing for the presenting symptom. Total direct costs were also compared. Results The group consisted of 44% women of mean age 53 ± 10 years. There were no differences in risk factors or pretest probability of obstructive CAD (83% intermediate risk) between groups. During mean follow-up of 30 ± 7 months, we found no difference between CCTA and MPS in per-patient rates of any posttest evaluation or testing, 24.6% versus 27.7% ( P = 0.44), respectively. CCTA patients had lower utilization of invasive angiography (3.3% vs 8.1%; P = 0.02) and a nonsignificant trend toward reduced downstream cardiac testing (11.5% vs 17.0%; P = 0.08). Including the evaluation of significant incidental findings (7.1% in CCTA), mean direct costs were significantly lower using CCTA ($808; 95% CI, $611–$1005) compared with MPS ($1315; 95% CI, $1105–$1525; P &lt;0.001). Conclusions Low-intermediate risk patients without known CAD who underwent CCTA, compared with MPS, had similar rates of posttest evaluations, fewer invasive catheterizations, and lower overall evaluation costs.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>21256102</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jcct.2010.11.005</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1934-5925
ispartof Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography, 2011-03, Vol.5 (2), p.101-109
issn 1934-5925
1876-861X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_861592888
source ScienceDirect Freedom Collection
subjects Analysis of Variance
Cardiac computed tomography
Cardiovascular
Case-Control Studies
Chi-Square Distribution
Coronary Angiography - economics
Coronary Angiography - methods
Coronary artery disease
Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Myocardial perfusion stress
Radiopharmaceuticals
Resource utilization
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Single photon emission computed tomography
Statistics, Nonparametric
Technetium Tc 99m Sestamibi
Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon - economics
Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon - methods
Tomography, X-Ray Computed - economics
Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods
title Cardiac CT angiography compared with myocardial perfusion stress testing on downstream resource utilization
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T18%3A37%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cardiac%20CT%20angiography%20compared%20with%20myocardial%20perfusion%20stress%20testing%20on%20downstream%20resource%20utilization&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cardiovascular%20computed%20tomography&rft.au=Cheezum,%20Michael%20K.,%20MD&rft.date=2011-03-01&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=101&rft.epage=109&rft.pages=101-109&rft.issn=1934-5925&rft.eissn=1876-861X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jcct.2010.11.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E861592888%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-20b8f454560b006add972190ee02304076172a9208fa4c456352d295eddf20fb3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=861592888&rft_id=info:pmid/21256102&rfr_iscdi=true