Suppr超能文献

冠状动脉钙评分作为低阻塞性冠心病术前概率患者进一步检查的“把关者”:一项成本效益分析。

Coronary artery calcium score as a gatekeeper for further testing in patients with low pretest probability of obstructive coronary artery disease: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Hospital de Santa Cruz, Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Ocidental, Lisbon, Portugal.

Department of Cardiology, Hospital de Santa Cruz, Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Ocidental, Lisbon, Portugal.

出版信息

Rev Port Cardiol. 2023 Jul;42(7):617-624. doi: 10.1016/j.repc.2023.03.005. Epub 2023 Mar 21.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Current guidelines recommend not routinely testing patients with chest pain and low pretest probability (PTP <15%) of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), but envisage the use of risk modifiers, such as coronary artery calcium score (CACS), to refine patient selection for testing. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of three different testing strategies in this population: (A) defer testing; (B) perform CACS, withholding further testing if CACS=0, and proceeding to coronary CT angiography (CCTA) if CACS>0; (C) CCTA in all.

METHODS

We developed a CE model using data from a two-center cross-sectional study of 1385 patients with non-acute chest pain and PTP <15% undergoing CACS followed by CCTA. Key input data included the prevalence of obstructive CAD on CCTA (10.3%), the proportion with CACS=0 (57%), and the negative predictive value of CACS for obstructive CAD on CCTA (98.1%).

RESULTS

Not testing would correctly classify 89.7% of cases and at a cost of €121433 per 1000 patients. Using CACS as a gatekeeper for CCTA would correctly diagnose 98.9% of cases and cost €247116/1000 patients. Employing first-line CCTA would correctly classify all patients, at a cost of €271007/1000 diagnosed patients. The added cost for an additional correct diagnosis was €1366 for CACS±CCTA vs. no testing, and €2172 for CCTA vs. CACS±CCTA.

CONCLUSIONS

CACS as a gatekeeper for further testing is cost-effective between a threshold of €1366 and €2172 per additional correct diagnosis. CCTA yields the most correct diagnoses and is cost-effective above a threshold of €2172.

摘要

简介和目的

目前的指南建议对胸痛且阻塞性冠状动脉疾病(CAD)的术前低概率(PTP <15%)患者不进行常规检查,但设想使用风险修饰符,如冠状动脉钙评分(CACS),以细化患者的检查选择。我们旨在评估三种不同测试策略在该人群中的成本效益(CE):(A)推迟测试;(B)进行 CACS,如果 CACS=0,则不进行进一步测试,如果 CACS>0,则进行冠状动脉 CT 血管造影(CCTA);(C)所有患者均进行 CCTA。

方法

我们使用来自两个中心的横断面研究的数据,该研究共纳入 1385 名胸痛且 PTP <15%且接受 CACS 后行 CCTA 的患者。关键输入数据包括 CCTA 上阻塞性 CAD 的患病率(10.3%)、CACS=0 的比例(57%)以及 CACS 对 CCTA 上阻塞性 CAD 的阴性预测值(98.1%)。

结果

不进行测试将正确分类 89.7%的病例,每位患者的成本为 121433 欧元。使用 CACS 作为 CCTA 的门控测试将正确诊断 98.9%的病例,每位患者的成本为 247116 欧元。采用一线 CCTA 将正确分类所有患者,每位诊断患者的成本为 271007 欧元。CACS±CCTA 与不进行测试相比,每增加一个正确诊断的额外成本为 1366 欧元,CCTA 与 CACS±CCTA 相比,每增加一个正确诊断的额外成本为 2172 欧元。

结论

CACS 作为进一步检查的门控测试,在每增加一个正确诊断的成本为 1366 欧元至 2172 欧元之间具有成本效益。CCTA 可以获得最多的正确诊断,在每增加一个正确诊断的成本超过 2172 欧元时具有成本效益。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验