Dear Cardiac Insider,
A key argument waged by opponents of coronary CT angiography (CTA) is that it would simply add another expensive test to the conventional diagnostic workup -- angiography, nuclear stress testing, and the like -- increasing overall costs while contributing little new diagnostic information.
Many clinicians who use coronary CTA say it absolutely cuts costs, replacing more expensive exams and permitting a more confident diagnosis of coronary artery stenosis. At this early stage of the game, however, few studies are available to support the view of CTA as a money saver.
But radiologists and cardiologists in Argentina say the evidence is clear. Their new study found that for patients with chest pain and a low risk of coronary artery disease, coronary CTA reduced costs substantially compared with the standard diagnostic workup.
See what they found in this issue's Insider Exclusive story, brought to you before it's available on our general site.
Also in coronary CTA, Dr. David Dowe from New Jersey lays out his best arguments in favor of scanning, well, just about everyone. Smart, controversial, and occasionally irreverent, this radiologist's talks are always worth a listen.
Meanwhile, an international multicenter trial concluded that MR first-pass myocardial perfusion imaging was at least equivalent to SPECT, and perhaps better, for detecting coronary artery stenosis. And a team from Atlanta found that coronary artery calcium can be used to select patients for myocardial perfusion PET.
Get the pulse of imaging news delivered to your inbox -- in your Cardiac Imaging Digital Community.
