|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence-based Practice |
1 From the Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care (E.B., P.J.N., T.B.v.d.W., Y.v.d.G.) and Depts of Radiology (W.P.T.M.M.), Neurology (L.J.K.), and Vascular Surgery (B.C.E.), Univ Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, Rm D01.335, 3584 CX Utrecht, the Netherlands; Program for Assessment of Radiologic Technology, Dept of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and Dept of Radiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (M.G.M.H.); and Dept of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass (M.G.M.H.). Received Jun 10, 2003; revision requested Aug 25; revision received Jan 6, 2004; accepted Feb 2. Supported by grant OG/030 from the Dutch Health Insurance Council, mandated by the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports. Address correspondence to E.B. (e-mail: e.buskens@umcutrecht.nl).
PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of noninvasive imaging strategies in patients who have had a transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke and are suspected of having significant carotid artery stenosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1997 through 2000, 350 patients were included in a multicenter blinded consecutive cohort study. The sensitivities and specificities of duplex ultrasonography (US), magnetic resonance (MR) angiography, and these two examinations combined were estimated by using digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. The actual costs (from a societal perspective) of performing imaging and endarterectomy were estimated. The survival, quality of life, and costs associated with stroke were based on data reported in the literature. Markov modeling was used to predict long-term outcomes. Subsequently, a decision model was used to calculate costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental costs per QALY gained for 62 examination-treatment strategies. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Duplex US had 88% sensitivity and 76% specificity with use of conventional cutoff criteria. MR angiography had comparable values: 92% sensitivity and 76% specificity. Combined concordant duplex US and MR angiography had superior diagnostic performance: 96% sensitivity and 80% specificity. Duplex US alone was the most efficient strategy. Adding MR angiography led to a marginal increase in QALYs gained but at prohibitive costs (cost-effectiveness ratio >
1 500 000 per QALY gained). Performing DSA owing to discordant duplex US and MR angiographic findings and to confirm duplex US and MR angiographic findings led to extra costs and QALY loss owing to complications. Sensitivity analyses revealed that duplex US as a stand-alone examination remained the preferred strategy while estimates and assumptions were varied across plausible ranges.
CONCLUSION: Duplex US performed without additional imaging is cost-effective in the selection of symptomatic patients suitable for endarterectomy. Adding MR angiography increases effectiveness slightly at disproportionately high costs, whereas DSA is inferior because of associated complications.
© RSNA, 2004
Index terms: Carotid arteries, MR, 172.12142, 904.12942 Carotid arteries, stenosis or obstruction, 172.721, 904.721 Carotid arteries, US, 172.12981, 172.12984, 904.12981, 904.12984 Cost-effectiveness Economics, medical
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
F. Runck, R.P. Steiner, W.A. Bautz, and M.M. Lell MR Imaging: Influence of Imaging Technique and Postprocessing on Measurement of Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., October 1, 2008; 29(9): 1736 - 1742. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. P. Greving, E. Buskens, H. Koffijberg, and A. Algra Cost-Effectiveness of Aspirin Treatment in the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Events in Subgroups Based on Age, Gender, and Varying Cardiovascular Risk Circulation, June 3, 2008; 117(22): 2875 - 2883. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Sassi and M. McKee Do clinicians always maximize patient outcomes? A conjoint analysis of preferences for carotid artery testing J Health Serv Res Policy, April 1, 2008; 13(2): 61 - 66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Saba, G. Caddeo, R. Sanfilippo, R. Montisci, and G. Mallarini CT and Ultrasound in the Study of Ulcerated Carotid Plaque Compared with Surgical Results: Potentialities and Advantages of Multidetector Row CT Angiography AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., June 1, 2007; 28(6): 1061 - 1066. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. J. R. van Beek and D. E. Malone Evidence-based Practice in Radiology Education: Why and How Should We Teach It? Radiology, June 1, 2007; 243(3): 633 - 640. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. F. Layton, J. Huston 3rd, H. J. Cloft, T. J. Kaufmann, K. N. Krecke, and D. F. Kallmes Specificity of MR Angiography as a Confirmatory Test for Carotid Artery Stenosis: Is It Valid? Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2007; 188(4): 1114 - 1116. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. R. Bates, C. J. D. Babb, D. E. Casey, C. U. Cates, G. R. Duckwiler, T. E. Feldman, W. A. Gray, K. Ouriel, E. D. Peterson, K. Rosenfield, et al. ACCF/SCAI/SVMB/SIR/ASITN 2007 Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Carotid Stenting: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents (ACCF/SCAI/SVMB/SIR/ASITN Clinical Expert Consensus Document Committee on Carotid Stenting) Vascular Medicine, February 1, 2007; 12(1): 35 - 83. [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
American Society of Interventional & Therapeutic N, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interve, Society for Vascular Medicine and Biology, Society of Interventional Radiology, E. R. Bates, J. D. Babb, D. E. Casey Jr, C. U. Cates, G. R. Duckwiler, T. E. Feldman, et al. ACCF/SCAI/SVMB/SIR/ASITN 2007 Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Carotid Stenting: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents (ACCF/SCAI/SVMB/SIR/ASITN Clinical Expert Consensus Document Committee on Carotid Stenting) J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 2, 2007; 49(1): 126 - 170. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Lell, C. Fellner, U. Baum, T. Hothorn, R. Steiner, W. Lang, W. Bautz, and F.A. Fellner Evaluation of Carotid Artery Stenosis with Multisection CT and MR Imaging: Influence of Imaging Modality and Postprocessing AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2007; 28(1): 104 - 110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Nikolaou, H. Kramer, C. Grosse, D. Clevert, O. Dietrich, M. Hartmann, P. Chamberlin, S. Assmann, M. F. Reiser, and S. O. Schoenberg High-Spatial-Resolution Multistation MR Angiography with Parallel Imaging and Blood Pool Contrast Agent: Initial Experience Radiology, December 1, 2006; 241(3): 861 - 872. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. H. Heijenbrok-Kal, E. Buskens, P. J. Nederkoorn, Y. van der Graaf, and M. G. M. Hunink Optimal Peak Systolic Velocity Threshold at Duplex US for Determining the Need for Carotid Endarterectomy: A Decision Analytic Approach Radiology, December 21, 2005; (2005) 2381041078. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
M. H. Heijenbrok-Kal, P. J. Nederkoorn, E. Buskens, Y. van der Graaf, and M.G. Myriam Hunink Diagnostic Performance of Duplex Ultrasound in Patients Suspected of Carotid Artery Disease: The Ipsilateral Versus Contralateral Artery Stroke, October 1, 2005; 36(10): 2105 - 2109. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Gaitini and M. Soudack Diagnosing Carotid Stenosis by Doppler Sonography: State of the Art J. Ultrasound Med., August 1, 2005; 24(8): 1127 - 1136. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. P. Derdeyn, E. Buskens, P. J. Nederkoorn, Y. van der Graaf, and M. G. M. Hunink Conventional Angiography Remains an Important Tool for Measurement of Carotid Arterial Stenosis * Dr Buskens and colleagues respond: Radiology, May 1, 2005; 235(2): 711 - 713. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Pelz, T. Andersson, P. Lylyk, M. Negoro, and M. Soderman Stroke Review: Advances in Interventional Neuroradiology 2004 Stroke, February 1, 2005; 36(2): 211 - 214. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |