ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2025
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography as the Preferred Exam in the Investigation of Stable Chest Pain in the Brazilian Private Healthcare System.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide. Strategies that prioritize early diagnosis can reduce the incidence of related complications and cost.
objectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) as the initial diagnostic strategy for stable chest pain in patients with intermediate pre-test probability of stable coronary artery disease (CAD), in comparison with invasive coronary angiography (ICA).
methodsA cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing CCTA and ICA, considering data from the Brazilian private healthcare system. The model considered the direct costs of diagnostic exams, medical supplies, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, and myocardial revascularization in the 5 regions of Brazil. A budget impact analysis was performed regarding the gradual incorporation of CCTA over 5 years, considering 100,000 lives as the eligible population.
resultsThe cost-effectiveness analysis comparing CCTA to ICA, estimated for a population of 100,000 lives, demonstrated cost savings of BRL 1,021.00 per life or a total of BRL 102,069,703.00 by the end of the fifth year. When considering the regional average cost of CCTA, for a population of 100,000 over 5 years, we observed the following cost savings per life and in 5 years, respectively: BRL 1,226.00 and BRL 122,577,793.00 in the North Region; BRL 1,460.00 and BRL 145,988,367.00 in the Northeast Region; BRL 1,625.00 and BRL 162,502,626.00 in the Central-West Region; BRL 1,313.00 and BRL 131,270,230.00 in the Southeast Region; and BRL 1,043.00 and BRL 104,268,937.00 in the South Region.
conclusionAs an initial strategy for investigating stable chest pain, CCTA is cost-effective compared to ICA and is associated with significant cost reductions in the Brazilian private healthcare system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.