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...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography 2011-03, Vol.5 (2), p.101-109 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
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 <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 <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 <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 |