ArticleJHLT open2024
Cost analysis of cardiac MRI for cardiac transplant surveillance.
Article in JHLT open, 2024. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Current heart transplant health surveillance relies on frequent cardiac catheterization with endomyocardial biopsy (cath-EMB) to detect acute rejection (AR). Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an emerging diagnostic tool to detect signs of AR. Consistent with "Value MRI," we performed economic cost analysis modeling, if cardiac MRI is used for initial transplant surveillance rather than cath-EMB, while retaining the cath-EMB diagnostic "gold-standard." Methods: With annual AR incidence of 2.5 - 5% (cath-EMB), clinical scenarios were modeled using pessimistic, realistic, and optimistic MRI positive test rate for parametric T1 and T2 mapping. Using probability theory, "expected cost" per patient and total Medicare savings per patient were calculated. Monte Carlo simulation was then performed 5000 times to estimate "per patient" cost with MRI as initial test. Longitudinal 20-year cost savings was modeled for 2 surveillance scenarios (lenient and intense), assuming 2.2% inflation rate and various discount rates. Results: Medicare cost savings were $689, $903, and $974 per patient (pessimistic, realistic, and optimistic MRI positivity) with confirmatory cath-EMB. Monte Carlo simulation median cost savings per patient was $795 (range $637 - $958). Inflation-adjusted, lifetime cost savings per patient (3% discount rate) ranged from $9,651 (pessimistic testing results/lenient surveillance plan) to $28,154 (optimistic/intense surveillance). Lifetime cost savings for 500 transplant recipients ranged from $4.8 million (M) (pessimistic/lenient) to $14.1M (optimistic/intense). Conclusion: At even the most pessimistic MRI positive test rate, modeling suggests substantial Medicare cost savings when using MRI parametric mapping as surveillance for AR. Longitudinal cost savings are notable too.
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.