Key result
Among inpatients referred for invasive coronary angiography for ACS, 40% did not require intervention; 35% of these met criteria for CTCA, which costs £376 per patient compared to £9089 for ICA.
Why the study?
Does a local inpatient CT coronary angiography service reduce unnecessary invasive coronary angiography referrals and costs in selected patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Cohort (n=198)
No
Does a local inpatient CT coronary angiography service reduce unnecessary invasive coronary angiography referrals and costs in selected patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Implementing inpatient CT coronary angiography as a gatekeeper for invasive angiography in low-intermediate risk ACS patients could prevent unnecessary invasive procedures and significantly reduce healthcare costs.
May reduce unnecessary ICA and costs in selected ACS inpatients; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective trials before practice change.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a retrospective analysis of inpatients referred for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) at a tertiary centre, with suspected or confirmed acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Jersey General Hospital. We evaluated 198 inpatients referred for ICA with suspected or confirmed ACS over a 3-year period. Patients presenting with ST elevation myocardial infarction were excluded. The primary outcome was to identify the number of patients who did not require subsequent coronary intervention following ICA. Patient variables were measured to establish those who met European Society of Cardiology (ESC) criteria for consideration of CT coronary angiography (CTCA) as an alternative to ICA. Cost of care for those referred for ICA was calculated. RESULTS: ICA demonstrated evidence of coronary heart disease requiring coronary intervention in 119 (60%) of the referred patients. 28 (35%) of the patients not requiring coronary intervention at ICA met ESC criteria for preassessment with CTCA. The cost of care for this subgroup was £9089 per patient. Inpatient CTCA was calculated at £376 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Low-intermediate risk patients presenting with suspected or confirmed ACS to hospitals without onsite coronary revascularisation should be considered for in-hospital CTCA before consideration of ICA. Using CTCA as a gatekeeper for targeted ICA appears cost-effective, particularly for hospitals without the required onsite facilities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
MacLachlan et al. (2016) conducted a cohort in suspected or confirmed acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (n=198). Invasive coronary angiography was evaluated on number of patients who did not require subsequent coronary intervention following ICA. Among inpatients referred for invasive coronary angiography for ACS, 40% did not require intervention; 35% of these met criteria for CTCA, which costs £376 per patient compared to £9089 for ICA.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: