What type of study is this?

This is a Systematic Review study.

September 10, 2025Open Access

Cost effectiveness of CMR over MPS-SPECT: a systematic review of recent trends for diagnosing CAD

Key Points

CMR shows better cost effectiveness compared to MPS-SPECT for diagnosing CAD in symptomatic patients.
In the USA, total costs are generally lower with CMR than with MPS-SPECT for low-to-intermediate PTP CAD.
Thirteen studies were analyzed, revealing mixed results on quality-adjusted life-years in Europe, particularly in the UK.
Limited reports on CMR's economic benefits highlight the need for further research to confirm findings.

Abstract

The health economic impacts of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy by single photon emission computed tomography (MPS-SPECT) as diagnostic modalities are not well understood. This review is based on a wider systematic review and aims to compare CMR and MPS-SPECT as first-line, non-invasive modalities for the diagnosis of symptomatic individuals with a low-to-intermediate pre-test probability of coronary artery disease (CAD). We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE and Embase, MEDLINE In-process, the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the UK National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database of Abstract of Reviews and Effects. Studies from January 1992 to January 2023 were included, if they were based in the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, China, and/or the USA (published in any language). Risk of bias was assessed using the Drummond checklist. Thirteen relevant reports were identified. In the USA, CMR was consistently cost effective compared with MPS-SPECT for patients with a low-to-intermediate pre-test probability (PTP) of CAD; resource use and associated costs, as well as total costs, were lower. For patients with a low-to-intermediate PTP of CAD in Europe, CMR was cost effective in Germany, while in the UK increases in quality-adjusted life-years were found but cost savings were mixed.This review found only thirteen reports on the economic benefits of CMR over MPS-SPECT, with just three providing cost-effectiveness outcomes, highlighting the need for further research across different settings and perspectives. Overall, findings suggest that the cost savings from using CMR compared with MPS-SPECT for patients with a low-to-intermediate PTP of CAD support prioritized investment; however, confirmatory research is needed given the limited number of cost-effectiveness analyses identified in this review.

Read Full Paperexternally

KI fragen

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kluge et al. (Thu,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68c1ce7054b1d3bfb60f5ad8 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2025.2550331

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

KI fragen

Bookmark

View Full Paper