ArticleClinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology2017
Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Incremental Value in a Series of 361 Patients Demonstrating Cost Savings and Clinical Benefits: An Outcome-Based Study.
Article in Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- American Society of Hematology 2026 guidelines on diagnosis of light chain amyloidosis.Blood advances · 2026Guideline
- Recent Progress of Cardiac MRI for Nuclear Medicine Professionals.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Review
- Review
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Heart Failure.Cardiovascular innovations and applications · 2024Article
- Challenges and opportunities for early career medical professionals in cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging: a white paper from the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023Review
- The Merits, Limitations, and Future Directions of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Cardiac MRI with a Focus on Coronary Artery Disease: A Literature Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Review
- Cardiac MRI assessment of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in Cardio-Oncology: Advantages, Importance of Expediency, and Considerations to Navigate Pre-Authorization.JACC. CardioOncology · 2021Review
- Cardiac-CT and cardiac-MR cost-effectiveness: a literature review.La Radiologia medica · 2020Review
- Fully automated quantification of biventricular volumes and function in cardiovascular magnetic resonance: applicability to clinical routine settings.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2019Article
- Endovascular rescue of long-term vascular graft implants and need for continuous surveillance.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study was designed to assess the clinical impact and cost-benefit of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). In the face of current health care cost concerns, cardiac imaging modalities have come under focused review. Data related to CMR clinical impact and cost-benefit are lacking. METHODS AND
resultsRetrospective review of 361 consecutive patients (pts) who underwent CMR exams was conducted. Indications for CMR were tabulated for appropriateness criteria. Components of the CMR exam were identified along with evidence of clinical impact. The cost of each CMR exam was ascertained along with cost savings attributable to the CMR exam for calculation of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. A total of 354 of 361 pts (98%) had diagnostic quality studies. Of the 361 pts, 350 (97%) had at least 1 published Appropriateness Criterion for CMR. A significant clinical impact attributable to CMR exam results was observed in 256 of 361 pts (71%). The CMR exam resulted in a new diagnosis in 69 of 361 (27%) pts. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging results avoided invasive procedures in 38 (11%) pts and prevented additional diagnostic testing in 26 (7%) pts. Comparison of health care savings using CMR as opposed to current standards of care showed a net cost savings of $833 037, ie, per patient cost savings of $2308.
conclusionsCardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging provides diagnostic image quality in >98% of cases. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging findings have documentable clinical impact on patient management in 71% of pts undergoing the exam, in a cost beneficial manner.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.