Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2015 Jul;16(6):647-55.
doi: 10.1007/s10198-014-0616-2. Epub 2014 Jul 3.

Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional invasive coronary angiography

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional invasive coronary angiography

Meryl Darlington et al. Eur J Health Econ. 2015 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the costs and cost-effectiveness of a diagnostic strategy including computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) in comparison with invasive conventional coronary angiography (CA) for the detection of significant coronary artery disease from the point of view of the healthcare provider.

Methods: The average cost per CTCA was determined via a micro-costing method in four French hospitals, and the cost of CA was taken from the 2011 French National Cost Study that collects data at the patient level from a sample of 51 public or not-for-profit hospitals.

Results: The average cost of CTCA was estimated to be 180<euro> (95 % CI 162-206<euro>) based on the use of a 64-slice CT scanner active for 10 h per day. The average cost of CA was estimated to be 1,378<euro> (95 % CI 1,126-1,670<euro>). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CA for all patients over a strategy including CTCA triage in the intermediate risk group, no imaging test in the low risk group, and CA in the high risk group, was estimated to be 6,380<euro> (95 % CI 4,714-8,965<euro>) for each additional correctly classified patient. This strategy correctly classifies 95.3 % (95 % CI 94.4-96.2) of all patients in the population studied.

Conclusions: A strategy of CTCA triage in the intermediate-risk group, no imaging test in the low-risk group, and CA in the high-risk group, has good diagnostic accuracy and could significantly cut costs. Medium-term and long-term outcomes need to be evaluated in patients with coronary stenosis potentially misclassified by CTCA due to false negative examinations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Radiology. 2009 Dec;253(3):734-44 - PubMed
    1. Can J Cardiol. 2013 Mar;29(3):350-7 - PubMed
    1. Eur Heart J. 1996 Jan;17(1):64-75 - PubMed
    1. Radiology. 2008 Jul;248(1):254-63 - PubMed
    1. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008 Nov 18;52(21):1724-32 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources