DSA versus Multi–Detector Row CT Angiography in Peripheral Arterial Disease: Randomized Controlled Trial 1
Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, South Holland, Netherlands Radiology
(Impact Factor: 6.87).
11/2005; 237(2):727-37. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2372040616
To prospectively compare therapeutic confidence in, patient outcomes (in terms of quality of life) after, and the costs of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) with those of multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography as the initial diagnostic imaging test in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD).
Institutional medical ethics committee approval and patient informed consent were obtained. Between April 2000 and August 2001, patients with PAD were randomly assigned to undergo either DSA or multi-detector row CT angiography as the initial diagnostic imaging test. Outcomes were the therapeutic confidence assessed by physicians (on a scale from 0 to 10), the need for additional imaging, the health-related quality of life at 6-month follow-up, diagnostic and therapeutic costs, and the costs for a hospital stay. Costs were computed from a hospital perspective according to Dutch guidelines for cost calculations in health care. Mean outcomes were compared between groups with unpaired t testing and were adjusted for predictive baseline characteristics with multivariable regression analysis.
Among the 145 patients, 72 were randomly allocated to the DSA group and 73 to the CT angiography group. One patient in the DSA group had to be excluded. Mean age was 63 years in the DSA group and 64 years in the CT angiography group. There were 47 men in the DSA group and 58 men in the CT angiography group. Physician confidence in making a correct therapeutic choice was significantly higher at DSA (mean confidence score, 8.2) than at CT angiography (mean score, 7.2; P < .001). During 6-month follow-up, 14% less additional imaging was performed in the DSA group than in the CT angiography group (P = .3). No significant quality-of-life differences were found between groups. The diagnostic cost associated with DSA (564 +/- 210 euro [standard deviation]) was significantly higher than that associated with CT angiography (363 +/- 273 euro), a difference of -201 euro (95% confidence interval: -281 euro, -120 euro; P < .001). Therapeutic and hospitalization costs were similar for both strategies.
These results suggest that use of noninvasive multi-detector row CT angiography instead of DSA as the initial diagnostic imaging test for PAD provides sufficient information for therapeutic decision making and reduces imaging costs.
Available from: Hyuk Jun Yang
- "The number of patients who had multiple CT examinations on the same day and the number of CT angiographic examinations were also markedly increased since the time. With MDCT scanners, the acquisition of multi-planar reconstruction and sub-millimeter resolution images of the entire body is possible in a matter of seconds, and as a noninvasive diagnostic modality, MDCT has become a vital component in the ED (12). "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We wanted to assess the trends of computed tomography (CT) examinations in a pediatric emergency department (ED).
We searched the medical database to identify the pediatric patients who had visited the ED, and the number of CTs conducted from January 2001 to December 2010. We analyzed the types of CTs, according to the anatomic region, and the patients who underwent CT examinations for multiple regions. Data were stratified, according to the patient age (< 13 years and 13 ≤ ages < 18 years).
The number of CTs performed per 1000 patients increased by 92% during the 10-year period (per 1000 patients, increased from 50.1 CTs in 2001 to 156.5 CTs in 2006, and then decreased to 96.0 CTs in 2010). Although head CTs were performed most often (74.6% of all CTs), facial bone CTs showed the largest rate of increase (3188%) per 1000 patients, followed by cervical CTs (642%), abdominal CTs (474%), miscellaneous CTs (236%), chest CTs (89%) and head CTs (39%). The number of patients who had CT examinations for multiple regions in the same day showed a similar pattern of increase, to that of overall CT examinations. Increase of CT utilization was more pronounced in adolescents than in pediatric patients younger than 13 years (189% vs. 59%).
The utilization of CTs increases from 2001 to 2006, and has declined since 2006. The increase of CTs is more pronounced in adolescents, and facial bone CTs prevail in increased number of examination followed by cervical CTs, abdominal CTs, miscellaneous CTs, chest CTs, and head CTs.
Korean journal of radiology: official journal of the Korean Radiological Society 11/2012; 13(6):771-5. DOI:10.3348/kjr.2012.13.6.771 · 1.57 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Neue Entwicklungen in der Technik und der Nachverarbeitung haben den Stellenwert der nichtinvasiven CT-Angiographie (CTA) und MR-Angiographie (MRA) in der Diagnostik der peripheren arteriellen Verschlusskrankheit (PAVK) in den letzten Jahren weiter verbessert. Im klinischen Alltag wird die diagnostische Angiographie (DSA) immer mehr durch diese Verfahren ersetzt. Der Radiologe sollte mit den Indikationen, unterschiedlichen Techniken, der Nachverarbeitung und den Mglichkeiten und Anforderungen einer effektiven Visualisierung vertraut sein. Unter Bercksichtigung der gegenwrtigen Literatur werden methodologische Aspekte und die Rolle der CTA und MRA in der Diagnostik der PAVK dargestellt.New developments in technique and postprocessing have led to further improvement in diagnosing and evaluating peripheral arterial disease (PAD) by noninvasive computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). Under clinical conditions diagnostic conventional angiography (DSA) will be increasingly replaced by CTA and MRA. The radiologist has to become familiar with the field of indications, the different techniques, postprocessing tools, and effective visualization. In consideration of the current literature some methodological aspects and the role of CTA and MRA in PAD will be discussed.
Der Radiologe 10/2006; 46(11):941-947. DOI:10.1007/s00117-006-1415-2 · 0.43 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.