Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Myocardial Perfusion in Single-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: Implications for Transmural Assessment of Myocardial Perfusion

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Keijer ◽  
Albert van Rossum ◽  
Norbert Wilke ◽  
Machiel van Eenige ◽  
Michael Jerosch-herold ◽  
...  
2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 101
Author(s):  
Brage H Amundsen ◽  
Anders Thorstensen ◽  
Asbjørn Støylen ◽  
◽  
◽  
...  

The aim of this article is to discuss the present and future potential of deformation imaging by echocardiography and scar visualisation by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). The two methods are clearly different: one is concerned with function, the other with morphology. Echocardiography, with its versatility of methods and high applicability, will continue to be the workhorse in cardiac imaging of patients with CAD. Important additional information can be extracted from deformation imaging methods, especially due to the high temporal resolution in tissue Doppler. Deformation measurements in 3D images are still limited by their lower resolution compared with 2D but will continue to improve. The standardisation of image analysis and the collaboration within the echocardiographic community to conduct larger studies will be important tasks in the attempt to establish evidence for the new methods. Late enhancement MRI is a method with unique properties and will continue to be an important alternative in selected patients and settings, as well as an invaluable research tool.


Circulation ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 92 (9) ◽  
pp. 2723-2739 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernst E. van der Wall ◽  
Hubert W. Vliegen ◽  
Albert de Roos ◽  
Albert V.G. Bruschke

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e044054
Author(s):  
Victoria McCreanor ◽  
Alexandra Nowbar ◽  
Christopher Rajkumar ◽  
Adrian G Barnett ◽  
Darrel Francis ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with placebo in patients with single-vessel coronary artery disease and angina despite anti-anginal therapy.DesignA cost-effectiveness analysis comparing PCI with placebo. A Markov model was used to measure incremental cost-effectiveness, in cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, over 12 months. Health utility weights were estimated using responses to the EuroQol 5-level questionnaire, from the Objective Randomised Blinded Investigation with optimal medical Therapy of Angioplasty in stable angina trial and UK preference weights. Costs of procedures and follow-up consultations were derived from Healthcare Resource Group reference costs and drug costs from the National Health Service (NHS) drug tariff. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was undertaken to test the robustness of results to parameter uncertainty. Scenario analyses were performed to test the effect on results of reduced pharmaceutical costs in patients undergoing PCI, and the effect of patients crossing over from placebo to PCI due to refractory angina within 12 months.SettingFive UK NHS hospitals.Participants200 adult patients with stable angina and angiographically severe single-vessel coronary artery disease on anti-anginal therapy.InterventionsAt recruitment, patients received 6 weeks of optimisation of medical therapy for angina after which they were randomised to PCI or a placebo procedure.Outcome measuresIncremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as cost (in £) per QALY gained for PCI compared with placebo.ResultsThe estimated ICER is £90 218/QALY gained when using PCI compared with placebo in patients receiving medical treatment for angina due to single-vessel coronary artery disease. Results were robust under sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsThe ICER for PCI compared with placebo, in patients with single-vessel coronary artery disease and angina on anti-anginal medication, exceeds the threshold of £30 000 used by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence when undertaking health technology assessment for the NHS context.Trial registration: The ORBITA study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02062593.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document