folder

Cost-effectiveness analysis of stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for stable chest pain syndromes

Authors

  • Y. Ge
  • A. Pandya
  • K. Steel
  • S. Bingham
  • M. Jerosch-Herold
  • Y.Y. Chen
  • J.R. Mikolich
  • A.E. Arai
  • W.P. Bandettini
  • A.R. Patel
  • A. Farzaneh-Far
  • J.F. Heitner
  • C. Shenoy
  • S.W. Leung
  • J.A. Gonzalez
  • D.J. Shah
  • S.V. Raman
  • V.A. Ferrari
  • J. Schulz-Menger
  • R. Hachamovitch
  • M. Stuber
  • O.P. Simonetti
  • R.Y. Kwong

Journal

  • JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging

Citation

  • JACC Cardiovasc Imaging

Abstract

  • OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare, using results from the multicenter SPINS (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States) study, the incremental cost-effectiveness of a stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)-first strategy against 4 other clinical strategies for patients with stable symptoms suspicious for myocardial ischemia: 1) immediate x-ray coronary angiography (XCA) with selective fractional flow reserve for all patients; 2) single-photon emission computed tomography; 3) coronary computed tomographic angiography with selective computed tomographic fractional flow reserve; and 4) no imaging. BACKGROUND: Stress CMR perfusion imaging has established excellent diagnostic utility and prognostic value in coronary artery disease (CAD), but its cost-effectiveness in current clinical practice has not been well studied in the United States. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed to project health care costs and lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for symptomatic patients at presentation with a 32.4% prevalence of obstructive CAD. Rates of clinical events, costs, and quality-of-life values were estimated from SPINS and other published research. The analysis was conducted from a U.S. health care system perspective, with health and cost outcomes discounted annually at 3%. RESULTS: Using hard cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death or acute myocardial infarction) as the endpoint, total costs per person were lowest for the no-imaging strategy ($16,936) and highest for the immediate XCA strategy ($20,929). Lifetime QALYs were lowest for the no-imaging strategy (12.72050) and highest for the immediate XCA strategy (12.76535). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the CMR-based strategy compared with the no-imaging strategy was $52,000/QALY, whereas the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the immediate XCA strategy was $12 million/QALY compared with CMR. Results were sensitive to variations in model inputs for prevalence of disease, hazard rate ratio for treatment of CAD, and annual discount rate. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to invasive XCA, stress CMR can be a cost-effective gatekeeping tool in patients at risk for obstructive CAD in the United States. (Stress CMR Perfusion Imaging in the United States [SPINS] Study; NCT03192891.


DOI

doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.02.029