Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stress Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Stable Chest Pain Syndromes

JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Jul;13(7):1505-1517. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.02.029. Epub 2020 May 13.

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.

Keywords: cost-effectiveness; noninvasive test; stress cardiac MRI.

Publication types

  • Multicenter Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Chest Pain* / etiology
  • Coronary Angiography
  • Coronary Artery Disease*
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial
  • Humans
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging
  • Myocardial Perfusion Imaging
  • Predictive Value of Tests

Associated data

  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT03192891