Cost-effectiveness of short-protocol emergency brain MRI after negative non-contrast CT for minor stroke detection.
Brain MRI
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Ischemic stroke
Quality-adjusted life years
Secondary prevention
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2022
Feb 2022
Historique:
received:
12
03
2021
accepted:
25
06
2021
revised:
23
05
2021
pubmed:
30
8
2021
medline:
1
2
2022
entrez:
29
8
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To investigate the cost-effectiveness of supplemental short-protocol brain MRI after negative non-contrast CT for the detection of minor strokes in emergency patients with mild and unspecific neurological symptoms. The economic evaluation was centered around a prospective single-center diagnostic accuracy study validating the use of short-protocol brain MRI in the emergency setting. A decision-analytic Markov model distinguished the strategies "no additional imaging" and "additional short-protocol MRI" for evaluation. Minor stroke was assumed to be missed in the initial evaluation in 40% of patients without short-protocol MRI. Specialized post-stroke care with immediate secondary prophylaxis was assumed for patients with detected minor stroke. Utilities and quality-of-life measures were estimated as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Input parameters were obtained from the literature. The Markov model simulated a follow-up period of up to 30 years. Willingness to pay was set to $100,000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was calculated and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Additional short-protocol MRI was the dominant strategy with overall costs of $26,304 (CT only: $27,109). Cumulative calculated effectiveness in the CT-only group was 14.25 QALYs (short-protocol MRI group: 14.31 QALYs). In the deterministic sensitivity analysis, additional short-protocol MRI remained the dominant strategy in all investigated ranges. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis results from the base case analysis were confirmed, and additional short-protocol MRI resulted in lower costs and higher effectiveness. Additional short-protocol MRI in emergency patients with mild and unspecific neurological symptoms enables timely secondary prophylaxis through detection of minor strokes, resulting in lower costs and higher cumulative QALYs. • Short-protocol brain MRI after negative head CT in selected emergency patients with mild and unspecific neurological symptoms allows for timely detection of minor strokes. • This strategy supports clinical decision-making with regard to immediate initiation of secondary prophylactic treatment, potentially preventing subsequent major strokes with associated high costs and reduced QALY. • According to the Markov model, additional short-protocol MRI remained the dominant strategy over wide variations of input parameters, even when assuming disproportionally high costs of the supplemental MRI scan.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34455484
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-08222-z
pii: 10.1007/s00330-021-08222-z
pmc: PMC8794930
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1117-1126Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Stroke. 2010 Apr;41(4):661-6
pubmed: 20185781
N Engl J Med. 2018 Feb 22;378(8):708-718
pubmed: 29364767
N Engl J Med. 2018 Aug 16;379(7):611-622
pubmed: 29766770
J Clin Epidemiol. 1999 Mar;52(3):259-71
pubmed: 10210244
Radiology. 2018 Aug;288(2):518-526
pubmed: 29893641
Neuroradiology. 2013 Jul;55(7):827-35
pubmed: 23568701
Eur J Neurol. 2011 Mar;18(3):430-5
pubmed: 20642795
Value Health. 2005 Sep-Oct;8(5):572-80
pubmed: 16176495
Ann Neurol. 2005 Jun;57(6):848-54
pubmed: 15929051
N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 21;374(16):1533-42
pubmed: 27096581
J Comp Eff Res. 2015 Aug;4(4):377-84
pubmed: 26274799
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2007 Aug;7(4):357-63
pubmed: 20528418
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 21;9(8):e105413
pubmed: 25144396
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2018 Nov;67(7):1-64
pubmed: 30707669
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 03;11(2):e0148106
pubmed: 26840397
N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 28;371(9):796-7
pubmed: 25162885
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jun 07;378(23):2182-2190
pubmed: 29766771
Neuroepidemiology. 2013;40(1):50-5
pubmed: 23075482
Glob Health Action. 2018;11(1):1447828
pubmed: 29564962
Stroke. 2009 May;40(5):1710-20
pubmed: 19286581
Neurology. 2017 Jan 17;88(3):237-244
pubmed: 27927939
Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1432-42
pubmed: 17928046
JAMA. 2016 Sep 13;316(10):1093-103
pubmed: 27623463
Stroke. 2014 Jul;45(7):2160-236
pubmed: 24788967
Neurology. 2001 Jul 24;57(2):305-14
pubmed: 11468317
Stroke. 2015 Aug;46(8):2238-43
pubmed: 26138130
Lancet. 2005 Jul 2-8;366(9479):29-36
pubmed: 15993230
Neurology. 2015 Jun 2;84(22):2208-15
pubmed: 25934858
Stroke. 2016 Nov;47(11):2797-2804
pubmed: 27758942
Lancet. 2016 Jul 23;388(10042):365-375
pubmed: 27209146
Stroke. 1994 Jan;25(1):40-3
pubmed: 8266381
Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Feb;20(1):107-134
pubmed: 29909569
Value Health. 2016 Dec;19(8):929-935
pubmed: 27987642
Neurology. 2005 Mar 8;64(5):817-20
pubmed: 15753415
Invest Radiol. 2020 Mar;55(3):181-189
pubmed: 31917761
Cerebrovasc Dis Extra. 2013 Oct 08;3(1):130-6
pubmed: 24403904
Circulation. 2017 Mar 21;135(12):1145-1159
pubmed: 28159800
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 4;378(1):11-21
pubmed: 29129157
Int J Stroke. 2014 Jan;9(1):6-18
pubmed: 24350870
Lancet. 2016 Oct 8;388(10053):1459-1544
pubmed: 27733281