Cost-effective applications of cardiac computed tomography in coronary artery disease

References

• Lucas FL, DeLorenzo MA, Siewers AE, Wennberg DE. Temporal trends in the utilization of diagnostic testing and treatments for cardiovascular disease in the United States, 1993–2001. Circulation113, 374–379 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Wann S. Indications for coronary and cardiac computed tomographic angiography. Cardiol. Rev.15, 87–96 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Mark DB, Hlatky MA. Medical economics and the assessment of value in cardiovascular medicine: part I. Circulation106, 516–520 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mushlin AI, Ruchlin HS, Callahan MA. Cost–effectiveness of diagnostic tests. Lancet358, 1353–1355 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw LJ, Callister TQ, Raggi P. Establishing cost-effective thresholds for coronary disease screening: a predictive model with risk factors and coronary calcium. Circulation104, II–478 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Hunink MG, Kuntz KM, Fleischmann KE, et al. Non-invasive imaging for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: Focusing the development of new diagnostic technology. Ann. Intern. Med.131, 673–680 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Rourke RA, Brundage BH, Froelicher VF, et al. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association expert consensus document on electron beam computed tomography for thediagnosis of coronary artery disease (Committee on Electron Beam Computed Tomography). Circulation102, 126–140 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berman DS, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R et al. Comparative use of radionuclide stress testing, coronary artery calcium scanning, and noninvasive coronary angiography for diagnostic and prognostic cardiac assessment. Semin. Nucl. Med.37, 2–16 (2007).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berman DS, Hachamovitch R, Shaw LJ et al. Roles of nuclear cardiology, cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance: noninvasive risk stratification and a conceptual framework for the selection of noninvasive imaging tests in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J. Nucl. Med.47, 1107–1118 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuijf JD, Poldermans D, Shaw LJ et al. Diagnostic and prognostic value of non-invasive imaging in known or suspected coronary artery disease. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging.33, 93–104 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raggi P, Callister TQ, Cooil B et al. Evaluation of chest pain in patients with low to intermediate pretest probability of coronary artery disease by electron beam computed tomography. Am. J. Cardiol.85, 386–387 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Shaw LJ, Raggi P, Berman DS, Callister TQ. Cost effectiveness of screening for cardiovascular disease with measures of coronary calcium. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis.46, 171–184 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Etzioni RD, Kadane JB. Bayesian statistical methods in public health and medicine. Annu. Rev. Public Health.16, 23–41 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson PW, D’Agostino RB, Levy D et al. Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation97, 1837–1847 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch AT, Haskal ZJ, Hertzer NR et al. ACC/AHA 2005 Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with peripheral arterial disease (lower extremity, renal, mesenteric, and abdominal aortic): a collaborative report from the American Association for Vascular Surgery/Society for Vascular Surgery, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society for Vascular Medicine and Biology, Society of Interventional Radiology, and the ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Develop Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease): endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Society for Vascular Nursing; TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus; and Vascular Disease Foundation. Circulation113(11), e463–e654 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mark DB, Shaw LJ, Lauer MS, O’Malley PG, Heidenreich P. 34th Bethesda Conference: Task force #5 – Is atherosclerosis imaging cost effective? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.41, 1906–1917 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• O’Malley PG, Feurerstein IM, Taylor AJ. Impact of electron beam tomography, with or without case management, on motivation, behavioral change, and cardiovascular risk profile: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA289, 2215–2223 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ardehali R, Nasir K, Kolandaivelu A, Budoff MJ, Blumenthal RS. Screening patients for subclinical atherosclerosis with non-contrast cardiac CT. Atherosclerosis192, 235–242 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Budoff MJ, Diamond GA, Raggi P et al. Continuous probabilistic prediction of angiograpahically significant coronary artery disease using electron beam tomography. Circulation105, 1791–1796 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haberl R, Becker A, Leber A et al. Correlation of coronary calcification and angiographically documented stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: results of 1,764 patients. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.37, 451–457 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knez A, Becker A, Leber, et al. Relation of coronary calcium scores by electron beam tomography to obstructive disease in 2,115 symptomatic patients. Am. J. Cardiol.93, 1150–1152 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Budoff MJ, Shaw LJ, Liu ST, Weinstein SR et al. Long-term prognosis associated with coronary calcification: observations from a registry of 25,253 patients. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.49, 1860–1870 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw LJ, Raggi P, Schisterman E, Berman DS, Callister TQ. Prognostic value of cardiac risk factors and coronary artery calcium screening for all-cause mortality. Radiology228, 826–833 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenland P, LaBree L, Azen SP, Doherty TM, Detrano RC. Coronary artery calcium score combined with Framingham score for risk prediction in asymptomatic individuals. JAMA291, 210–215 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kondos GT, Hoff JA, Sevrukov A et al. Electron-beam tomography coronary artery calcium and cardiac events: a 37-month follow-up of 5635 initially asymptomatic low- to intermediate-risk adults. Circulation107, 2571–2576 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naghavi M, Falk E, Hecht HS et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient – Part III: Executive summary of the Screening for Heart Attack Prevention and Education (SHAPE) Task Force report. Am. J. Cardiol.98(2A), 2H–15H (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw LJ, Raggi P, Berman DS, Callister TQ. Coronary artery calcium as a measure of biologic age. Atherosclerosis188, 112–119 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Taylor AJ, Bindeman J, Feuerstein I, Cao F, Brazaitis M, O’Malley PG. Coronary calcium independently predicts incident premature coronary heart disease over measured cardiovascular risk factors: mean three-year outcomes in the Prospective Army Coronary Calcium (PACC) project. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.46, 807–814 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Malley PG, Greenberg BA, Taylor AJ. Cost–effectiveness of using electron beam computed tomography to identify patients at risk for clinical coronary artery disease. Am. Heart J.148, 106–113 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Diamond GA, Kaul S. The things to come of SHAPE: cost and effectiveness of cardiovascular prevention. Am. J. Cardiol.99, 1013–1015 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beller GA. Nonivasive screening for coronary atherosclerosis and silent ischemia in asymptomatic Type 2 diabetic patients: is it appropriate and cost-effective? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.49, 1918–1923 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Berman DS, Wong ND, Gransar H et al. Relationship between stress-induced myocardial ischemia and atherosclerosis measured by coronary calcium tomography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.44, 923–930 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamon M, Biondi-Zoccai GG, Malagutti P et al. Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared with conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.48, 1896–1910 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM et al. ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group, American College of Radiology, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Interventional Radiology. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.48, 1475–1497 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Shaw LJ, Devereux RB et al. Prognostic value of multidetector coronary computed tomographic angiography for prediction of all-cause mortality. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.50, 1161–1170 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pundziute G, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.49, 62–70 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstein JA, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, Ross MA, O’Neil BJ, Raff GL. A randomized controlled trial of multi-slice coronary computed tomography for evaluation of acute chest pain. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.49, 863–871 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Lin F, Shaw LJ, Legorreta A, Kang N, Gilmore A. Costs and clinical outcomes following coronary computed tomography angiography: a matched comparison to myocardial perfusion SPECT. J. Comput. Tomogr.1(Suppl. 1) (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Min JK, Lin F, Legorreta A, Kang N, Gilmore A. Differences in episode based costs for coronary computed tomographic angiography vs. myocardial perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Presented at: AHA: Cardiovascular Disease, Epidemiology and Prevention. FL, USA, March 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Min JK, Lin F, Legorreta A, Kang N, Gilmore A. Hospitalization outcomes in individuals undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography, myocardial perfusion imaging or cardiac angiogram catheterization for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Presented at: AHA: Cardiovascular Disease, Epidemiology and Prevention. FL, USA March 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Min JK, Lin F, Legorreta A, Kang N, Gilmore A. Cost–effectiveness and clinical outcomes of coronary computed tomographic angiography compared to myocardial perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.49(Suppl. 1), 831–837 (2007) (Abstract).
   Google Scholar
• Cole JH, Chunn VM, Morrow JA, Buckley RS, Phillips GM. Cost implications of initial computed tomography angiography as opposed to catheterization in patients with mildly abnormal or equivocal myocardial perfusion. J. Comput. Tomogr.1, 21–26 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Galper BZ, Brennan T. A Cost-effective analysis of 64-row cardiac computed tomography (CCT) for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease in the intermediate-risk population: a reflection on recent ACC CCT appropriateness criteria. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.49(Suppl. 1) 831–838 (2007) (Abstract).
   Google Scholar