Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40145040›Full record

ArticleJHLT open2024

Cost analysis of cardiac MRI for cardiac transplant surveillance.

Margaret M Samyn, Ke Yan, Aspen Duffin, Kimberly Crum, Gail Stendhal, Justin Godown, Steve J Kindel, Carly Lockard, Bruce Damon, Jonathan Soslow and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Margaret M SamynMedical College of Wisconsin, Herma Heart Institute at Children's Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Ke YanMedical College of Wisconsin Quantitative Health Sciences, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Aspen DuffinMedical College of Wisconsin, Herma Heart Institute at Children's Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Kimberly CrumVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Gail StendhalMedical College of Wisconsin, Herma Heart Institute at Children's Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Justin GodownVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Steve J KindelMedical College of Wisconsin, Herma Heart Institute at Children's Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Carly LockardCarle Foundation Hospital, Urbana, Illinois.
Bruce DamonVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Jonathan SoslowVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
John Affleck-GravesUniversity of Notre Dame Mendoza College of Business, Notre Dame, Indiana.
PEACE Investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

biopsycost analysisheart transplantMRIrejection surveillance

Identifiers

PMID40145040
PMCPMC11935320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.