In:
European Cardiology Review, Radcliffe Media Media Ltd, Vol. 6, No. 2 ( 2010), p. 54-
Abstract:
This study compares the clinical and technical utility of non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (nce-MRA) and contrastenhanced MRA (ce-MRA) in a mini-review of patients with suspected peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) in whom both MRA approaches were indicated. It also looks at the costs of angiography for diagnosing peripheral arterial occlusive disease using either ce-MRA or nce-MRA in comparison with the example of fresh blood imaging (FBI). The costs for MRA were taken from a previous cost study and those for nce-MRA/FBI from published data and appropriate calculations. The average total investigation costs for ce-MRA were found to be €205, including €59 for consumables, mainly originating from the contrast agent costs (according to German list prices for 2009). On the other hand, for nce-MRA, average total costs ranged from €190 to €239, depending on the acquisition time (12–32 minutes), and a larger number of additional diagnostic investigations were found. Irrespective of costs, several clinical and technical benefits such as image quality, higher robustness and the absence of limitations with complex vessel courses favoured ce-MRA. The consequences of using ce-MRA were fewer technical failures and, therefore, a higher throughput of patients indicated for contrast agent use in the radiology department; this led to more procedures per day and, therefore, more efficient use of diagnostic imaging resources.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1758-3756
DOI:
10.15420/ecr.2010.6.2.54
Language:
English
Publisher:
Radcliffe Media Media Ltd
Publication Date:
2010
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2813997-5