Venous thromboembolism: annualised United States models for total, hospital-acquired and preventable costs utilising long-term attack rates.

Healthcare reform is upon the United States (US) healthcare system. Prioritisation of preventative efforts will guide necessary transitions within the US healthcare system. While annual deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) costs have recently been defined at the US national level, annual pulmonary embolism (PE) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) costs have not yet been defined. A decision tree and cost model were developed to estimate US health care costs for total PE, total hospital-acquired PE, and total hospital-acquired "preventable" PE. The previously published DVT cost model was modified, updated and combined with the PE cost model to elucidate the same three categories of costs for VTE. Direct and indirect costs were also delineated. For VTE in the base model, annual cost ranges in 2011 US dollars for total, hospital- acquired, and hospital-acquired "preventable" costs and were $13.5-$27.2, $9.0-$18.2, and $4.5-$14.2 billion, respectively. The first sensitivity analysis, with higher incidence rates and costs, demonstrated annual US total, hospital-acquired, and hospital-acquired "preventable" VTE costs ranging from $32.1-$69.3, $23.7-$51.5, and $11.9-$39.3 billion, respectively. The second sensitivity analysis with long-term attack rates (LTAR) for recurrent events and post-thrombotic syndrome and chronic pulmonary thromboembolic hypertension demonstrated annual US total, hospital-acquired, and hospital-acquired "preventable" VTE costs ranging from $15.4-$34.4, $10.3-$25.4, and $5.1-$19.1 billion, respectively. PE costs comprised a majority of the VTE costs. Prioritisation of effective VTE preventative strategies will reduce significant costs, morbidity and mortality within the US healthcare system. The cost models may be utilised to estimate other countries' costs or VTE-specific disease states.

Quantitative assessment of in-stent dimensions: a comparison of 64 and 16 detector multislice computed tomography to intravascular ultrasound.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the utility of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) technology to evaluate coronary stent luminal diameter. BACKGROUND: Stent metal induced "blooming" artifact makes quantitative coronary angiography by MSCT difficult. There is a paucity of data on the efficacy of using 64 and 16 detector MSCT in evaluating coronary stents. METHODS: We evaluated four commercially available bare metal and polymer coated drug eluting stents using 64 and 16 detector MSCT for the following: (1) Strut density in Hounsfield's Units (Hu) using a 2 mm MIP; (2) In-stent luminal diameter (ISLD) measured by MSCT compared to intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). RESULTS: Increased strut thickness did not correlate with greater strut density as measured in Hu (R(2) = 0.05, P = 0.29). The ISLD by 16 MSCT vs. IVUS is: Vision 1.63 +/- 0.58 mm vs. 2.8 +/- 0.0; Cypher 1.80 +/- 0.00 vs. 2.9 +/- 0.0; Taxus 1.87 +/- 0.58 vs. 2.9 +/- 0.0; Liberté 1.80 +/- 0.10 vs. 3.0 +/- 0.1 (P < 0.01). ISLD determined by 64 MSCT vs. IVUS is: Vision 1.73 +/- 0.06 mm vs. 2.8 +/- 0.0; Cypher 1.87 +/- 0.12 vs. 2.9 +/- 0.0; Taxus 1.77 +/- 0.06 vs. 2.9 +/- 0.0; Liberté 1.80 +/- 0.10 vs. 3.0 +/- 0.1 (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: When compared to IVUS measurements, MSCT results in a significant, underestimation of ISLD. This consistent underestimation (even with 64 MSCT) limits the applicability of CT angiography to quantify in-stent restenosis.