FFRct use for acute chest pain triage in the emergency department: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Abstract

Aims

To model and assess the cost-effectiveness of CT-based fractional flow reserve (FFRct) for a population of low to intermediate risk patients for coronary artery disease (CAD) presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute chest pain.

Methods and results

Using a decision tree model with a 1 year time horizon and from a health care perspective, two diagnostic pathways using FFRct are compared to current clinical routine combining coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) with an exercise test. Model data are drawn from the literature and nationally reported data. Outcomes are assessed as the number of avoided invasive coronary angiographies (ICAs) showing no obstructive CAD and quality of life (QoL) in a theoretical cohort of 1000 patients. Sensitivity analyses are performed to test the robustness of the results. Determining FFRct when CCTA is inconclusive is a cost-effective and dominant strategy with a potential saving of 198€/patient, 154 avoided unnecessary ICA showing no obstructive CAD (uICA)/1000 patients and an average improvement in QoL of 0.008 QALY/patient. With an additional 574€/patient, 8 avoided uICA/1000 patients and an improvement in QoL of 0.001 QALY/patient, a strategy where FFRct is always performed is cost-effective only when considering high cost-effectiveness thresholds.

Conclusions

For patients presenting to the ED with acute chest pain and a low to intermediate pre-test probability of CAD, a diagnostic strategy where FFRct is determined after an inconclusive CCTA is cost-effective. Clinical trials investigating both sensitivity and specificity of FFRct, as well as QoL associated with the use of this technology in this setting are warranted.

Keywords:

• Cost-effectiveness analysis
• invasive coronary angiography
• coronary computed tomography angiography
• fractional flow reserve
• acute coronary syndrome

Acknowledgements

Dr Sonck has been supported by a research grant provided by the Cardiopath PhD program.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Funding

Dr Sonck has been supported by a research grant provided by the Cardiopath PhD Program.