Browsing by Author "Kelle, Sebastian"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Evidence-based cardiovascular magnetic resonance cost-effectiveness calculator for the detection of significant coronary artery disease
    (BMC, 2022) Pandya, Ankur; Yu, Yuan‑Jui; Ge, Yin; Nagel, Eike; Kwong, Raymond Y.; Bakar, Rafidah Abu; Grizzard, John D.; Merkler, Alexander E.; Ntusi, Ntobeko; Petersen, Steffen E.; Rashedi, Nina; Schwitter, Juerg; Selvanayagam, Joseph B.; White, James A.; Carr, James; Raman, Subha V.; Simonetti, Orlando P.; Bucciarelli‑Ducci, Chiara; Sierra‑Galan, Lilia M.; Ferrari, Victor A.; Bhatia, Mona; Kelle, Sebastian; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: Although prior reports have evaluated the clinical and cost impacts of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) for low-to-intermediate-risk patients with suspected significant coronary artery disease (CAD), the cost-effectiveness of CMR compared to relevant comparators remains poorly understood. We aimed to summarize the cost-effectiveness literature on CMR for CAD and create a cost-effectiveness calculator, useable worldwide, to approximate the cost-per-quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) of CMR and relevant comparators with context-specific patient-level and system-level inputs. Methods: We searched the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry and PubMed for cost-per-QALY or cost-per-life-year-saved studies of CMR to detect significant CAD. We also developed a linear regression meta-model (CMR Cost-Effectiveness Calculator) based on a larger CMR cost-effectiveness simulation model that can approximate CMR lifetime discount cost, QALY, and cost effectiveness compared to relevant comparators [such as single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)] or invasive coronary angiography. Results: CMR was cost-effective for evaluation of significant CAD (either health-improving and cost saving or having a cost-per-QALY or cost-per-life-year result lower than the cost-effectiveness threshold) versus its relevant comparator in 10 out of 15 studies, with 3 studies reporting uncertain cost effectiveness, and 2 studies showing CCTA was optimal. Our cost-effectiveness calculator showed that CCTA was not cost-effective in the US compared to CMR when the most recent publications on imaging performance were included in the model. Conclusions: Based on current world-wide evidence in the literature, CMR usually represents a cost-effective option compared to relevant comparators to assess for significant CAD.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    SCMR level II/independent practitioner training guidelines for cardiovascular magnetic resonance: integration of a virtual training environment
    (BMC, 2021-12-27) Patel, Amit R.; Kelle, Sebastian; Fontana, Marianna; Jacob, Ron; Stojanovska, Jadranka; Collins, Jeremy; Patel, Hena N.; Francone, Marco; Han, Yuchi; Bandettini, W. Patricia; Bucciarelli‑Ducci, Chiara; Raman, Subha; Weissman, Gaby; Medicine, School of Medicine
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Registry at 150,000
    (Elsevier, 2024-07-04) Tong, Matthew S.; Slivnick, Jeremy A.; Sharif, Behzad; Kim, Han W.; Young, Alistair A.; Sierra-Galan, Lilia M.; Mukai, Kanae; Farzaneh-Far, Afshin; Al-Kindi, Sadeer; Chan, Angel T.; Dibu, George; Elliott, Michael D.; Ferreira, Vanessa M.; Grizzard, John; Kelle, Sebastian; Lee, Simon; Malahfji, Maan; Petersen, Steffen E.; Polsani, Venkateshwar; Toro-Salazar, Olga H.; Shaikh, Kamran A.; Shenoy, Chetan; Srichai, Monvadi B.; Stojanovska, Jadranka; Tao, Qian; Wei, Janet; Weinsaft, Jonathan W.; Wince, W. Benjamin; Chudgar, Priya D.; Judd, Matthew; Judd, Robert M.; Shah, Dipan J.; Simonetti, Orlando P.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is increasingly utilized to evaluate expanding cardiovascular conditions. The Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) Registry is a central repository for real-world clinical data to support cardiovascular research, including those relating to outcomes, quality improvement, and machine learning. The SCMR Registry is built on a regulatory-compliant, cloud-based infrastructure that houses searchable content and Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine images. The goal of this study is to summarize the status of the SCMR Registry at 150,000 exams. Methods: The processes for data security, data submission, and research access are outlined. We interrogated the Registry and presented a summary of its contents. Results: Data were compiled from 154,458 CMR scans across 20 United States sites, containing 299,622,066 total images (∼100 terabytes of storage). Across reported values, the human subjects had an average age of 58 years (range 1 month to >90 years old), were 44% (63,070/145,275) female, 72% (69,766/98,008) Caucasian, and had a mortality rate of 8% (9,962/132,979). The most common indication was cardiomyopathy (35,369/131,581, 27%), and most frequently used current procedural terminology code was 75561 (57,195/162,901, 35%). Macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agents represented 89% (83,089/93,884) of contrast utilization after 2015. Short-axis cines were performed in 99% (76,859/77,871) of tagged scans, short-axis late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in 66% (51,591/77,871), and stress perfusion sequences in 30% (23,241/77,871). Mortality data demonstrated increased mortality in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <35%, the presence of wall motion abnormalities, stress perfusion defects, and infarct LGE, compared to those without these markers. There were 456,678 patient-years of all-cause mortality follow-up, with a median follow-up time of 3.6 years. Conclusion: The vision of the SCMR Registry is to promote evidence-based utilization of CMR through a collaborative effort by providing a web mechanism for centers to securely upload de-identified data and images for research, education, and quality control. The Registry quantifies changing practice over time and supports large-scale real-world multicenter observational studies of prognostic utility.