Cost evaluation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance versus coronary angiography for the diagnostic work-up of coronary artery disease: Application of the European Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance registry data to the German, United Kingdom, Swiss, and United States health care systems.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has favorable characteristics for diagnostic evaluation and risk stratification of patients with known or suspected CAD. CMR utilization in CAD detection is growing fast. However, data on its cost-effectiveness are scarce. The goal of this study is to compare the costs of two strategies for detection of significant coronary artery stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD): 1) Performing CMR first to assess myocardial ischemia and/or infarct scar before referring positive patients (defined as presence of ischemia and/or infarct scar to coronary angiography (CXA) versus 2) a hypothetical CXA performed in all patients as a single test to detect CAD. METHODS: A subgroup of the European CMR pilot registry was used including 2,717 consecutive patients who underwent stress-CMR. From these patients, 21% were positive for CAD (ischemia and/or infarct scar), 73% negative, and 6% uncertain and underwent additional testing. The diagnostic costs were evaluated using invoicing costs of each test performed. Costs analysis was performed from a health care payer perspective in German, United Kingdom, Swiss, and United States health care settings. RESULTS: In the public sectors of the German, United Kingdom, and Swiss health care systems, cost savings from the CMR-driven strategy were 50%, 25% and 23%, respectively, versus outpatient CXA. If CXA was carried out as an inpatient procedure, cost savings were 46%, 50% and 48%, respectively. In the United States context, cost savings were 51% when compared with inpatient CXA, but higher for CMR by 8% versus outpatient CXA. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that from an economic perspective, the use of CMR should be encouraged as a management option for patients with suspected CAD.

Cost evaluation of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging versus coronary angiography for the work-up of coronary artery disease

Background: CMR has recently emerged as a robust and reliable technique to assess coronary artery disease (CAD). A negative perfusion CMR test predicts low event rates of 0.3-0.5%/year. Invasive coronary angiography (CA) remains the "gold standard" for the evaluation of CAD in many countries.Objective: Assessing the costs of the two strategies in the European CMR registry for the work-up of known or suspected CAD from a health care payer perspective. Strategy 1) a CA to all patients or 2) a CA only to patients who are diagnosed positive for ischemia in a prior CMR.Method and results: Using data of the European CMR registry (20 hospitals, 11'040 consecutive patients) we calculated the proportion of patients who were diagnosed positive (20.6%), uncertain (6.5%), and negative (72.9%) after the CMR test in patients with known or suspected CAD (n=2'717). No other medical test was performed to patients who were negative for ischemia. Positive diagnosed patients had a coronary angiography. Those with uncertain diagnosis had additional tests (84.7%: stress echocardiography, 13.1%: CCT, 2.3% SPECT), these costs were added to the CMR strategy costs. Information from costs for tests in Germany and Switzerland were used. A sensibility analysis was performed for inpatient CA. For costs see figure. Results - costs.Discussion: The CMR strategy costs less than the CA strategy for the health insurance systems both, in Germany and Switzerland. While lower in costs, the CMR strategy is a non-invasive one, does not expose to radiation, and yields additional information on cardiac function, viability, valves, and great vessels. Developing the use of CMR instead of CA might imply some reduction in costs together with superior patient safety and comfort, and a better utilization of resources at the hospital level. Document introduit le : 01.12.2011

Cost evaluation and comparison of three decision strategies to revascularize : results of the suspected CAD protocol of the european CMR registry

Background: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is accepted as a method to assess suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Nonetheless, invasive coronary angiography (CXA) combined or not with fractional flow reserve (FFR) remains the main diagnostic test to evaluate CAD. Little data exist on the economic impact of the use of these procedures in a population with a low to intermediate pre-test probability. Objective: To compare the costs of 3 decision strategies to revascularize a patient with suspected CAD: 1) strategy guided by CMR 2) hypothetical strategy guided by CXA-FFR, 3) hypothetical strategy guided by CXA alone.

Cost evaluation and comparison of three decision strategies for cardiac revascularization : results of the suspected CAD protocol of the European CMR registry

Background: The public health burden of coronary artery disease (CAD) is important. Perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is generally accepted to detect and monitor CAD. Few studies have so far addressed its costs and costeffectiveness. Objectives: To compare in a large CMR registry the costs of a CMR-guided strategy vs two hypothetical invasive strategies for the diagnosis and the treatment of patients with suspected CAD. Methods: In 3'647 patients with suspected CAD included prospectively in the EuroCMR Registry (59 centers; 18 countries) costs were calculated for diagnostic examinations, revascularizations as well as for complication management over a 1-year follow-up. Patients with ischemia-positive CMR underwent an invasive X-ray coronary angiography (CXA) and revascularization at the discretion of the treating physician (=CMR+CXA strategy). Ischemia was found in 20.9% of patients and 17.4% of them were revascularized. In ischemia-negative patients by CMR, cardiac death and non-fatal myocardial infarctions occurred in 0.38%/y. In a hypothetical invasive arm the costs were calculated for an initial CXA followed by FFR testing in vessels with ≥50% diameter stenoses (=CXA+FFR strategy). To model this hypothetical arm, the same proportion of ischemic patients and outcome was assumed as for the CMR+CXA strategy. The coronary stenosis - FFR relationship reported in the literature was used to derive the proportion of patients with ≥50% diameter stenoses (Psten) in the study cohort. The costs of a CXA-only strategy were also calculated. Calculations were performed from a third payer perspective for the German, UK, Swiss, and US healthcare systems.

Cost evaluation process for competitors' products

A company’s capability to map out its cost position compared to other market players is important for competitive decision making. One aspect of cost position is direct product cost that illustrates the cost efficiency of a company’s product designs. If a company can evaluate and compare its own and other market players’ direct product costs, it can implement better decisions in product development and management, manufacturing, sourcing, etc. The main objective of this thesis was to develop a cost evaluation process for competitors’ products. This objective includes a process description and an analysis tool for cost evaluations. Additionally, process implementation is discussed as well. The main result of this thesis was a process description consisting of a sixteen steps process and an Excel based analysis tool. Since literature was quite limited in this field, the solution proposal was combined from many different theoretical concepts. It includes influences from reverse engineering, product cost assessment, benchmarking and cost based decision making. This solution proposal will lead to more systematic and standardized cost position analyses and result in better cost transparency in decision making.

National Driver Register (NDR) alternative program cost evaluation. Part II. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for nine Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Task VIII - FMVSS 301, fuel system integrity - determination of the model year when manufacturers made changes to meet Standard's 1976 requirements. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for nine Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards - Vol. V. - FMVSS 213.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for nine Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Volume I: FMVSS 105. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for nine Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Volume II: FMVSS 108. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for nine Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Volume III: FMVSS 122. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for nine Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Volume IV: FMVSS 202 and 207. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for nine Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Volume VI: FMVSS 220, 221 and 222. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for four federal motor vehicle safety standards. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost evaluation for nine Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards - Task IX: FMVSS 214, side door strength, identification and cost evaluation of design and manufacturing changes. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.