ArticleThe British journal of radiology2018
Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance carotid plaque imaging for primary stroke prevention in Canada.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Questionnaire Survey on the Current Use of Brain Docks and Their Compliance with Guidelines in Japan.Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMagnetic resonance of the carotid arteries provides important insight into plaque composition and vulnerability in addition to the traditional measure of stenosis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MR imaging as a first-line modality to assess carotid disease and guide management for high-risk patients with <50% stenosis.
methodsUsing TreeAge Pro, a cost-effectiveness simulation was conducted comparing two strategies: (a) standard of care first-line carotid duplex ultrasound (DUS) with regular follow-up, vs (b) first-line MR assessment of stenosis and intraplaque haemorrhage (MRIPH) in which patients with IPH received annual DUS surveillance and immediate carotid endarterectomy in case of plaque progression.
resultsFor patients aged 70 years old, using a first-line MRIPH strategy resulted in a 16.8% relative risk reduction in strokes compared to DUS (0.080 vs 0.097 strokes per patient per lifetime), and an increased quality-adjusted-life years (12.23 vs 12.20) at an increased cost of $897.33 over a patient's lifetime ($5784.53 vs $4887.20 average total cost per patient per lifetime). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $29,744 per quality-adjusted-life years. MRIPH remained cost-effective below a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 for 91.8% of sensitivity analyses.
conclusionMRIPH was found to be a cost-effective first-line tool to identify asymptomatic patients at high risk for stroke requiring annual surveillance and prompt management. Advances in Knowledge: Using MR imaging as a fist-line method to detect the presence of IPH provides clinically useful and cost-effective information that allows for enhanced risk evaluation and primary stroke prevention.
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.