Incidence and predictors of MRI scan utilization in MRI-conditional pacemaker recipients: A multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: Patient characteristics, higher device cost, and vendor contracts likely prevent use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-conditional pacemakers (MRC) in all pacemaker (PM)-eligible patients. We sought to identify the incidence and predictors of MRI scan utilization in MRC recipients. METHODS: Patients receiving an MRC or non-MRI-conditional PM (NMRC) at four centers were included. Incidence of MRI scans following PM insertion was obtained from hospital records and patient phone calls. RESULTS: Of 1,244 patients (74 ± 12 years, 54.6% male), 927 had MRC and 317 had NMRC. At baseline, MRC recipients had a higher incidence of atrial tachycardia and MRI risk factors (syncope, recurrent falls, neurological disease, severe musculoskeletal disease, malignancy). In the MRC group, more patients had commercial health insurance (26% vs 15%, P < 0.001). Sixty MRC patients (6.5%) had an MRI during 21 ± 17 months' follow-up. Using the Weilbull parametric survival model, the projected percentage of MRC patients receiving an MRI scan at 7- and 11-year follow-up were 45% and 73%, respectively. By multivariate regression, a prior history of MRI (odds ratio [OR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2-9.1, P < 0.001) and active smoking (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.1-6.7, P  =  0.039) independently predicted the performance of an MRI following MRC implant. CONCLUSIONS: In this MRC cohort, MRI scan utilization during follow-up was low but projection analyses showed a higher incidence over the lifetime of the MRC. A history of prior MRI and active smoking independently predicted the performance of an MRI scan during follow-up.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of magnetic resonance imaging-conditional pacemaker implantation: Insights from a multicenter study and implications in the current era.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-conditional pacemakers (M-PPMs) grant patients greater accessibility to MRI scans. The cost-effectiveness of implanting M-PPM is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of M-PPM implantation. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed on patients receiving a M-PPM across 4 institutions. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated by dividing the sum of the total incremental cost of implanting a M-PPM vs a conventional pacemaker and the cost of MRI scans by the utility of MRI scans in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained. QALY and lifespan of M-PPM (7-11 years) data were obtained from the literature. The benchmark of <$100,000 per QALY was used as the threshold for cost-effectiveness. Computer modeling/simulations were used to calculate the percentage of patients required to achieve this benchmark, to extrapolate the cumulative projected percentage of patients utilizing MRI scans over the lifespan of a M-PPM via the Weibull parametric survival model, and to conduct univariate and multivariate, probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The ICER during the follow-up period (21 ± 17 months) was $451,569. The cost-effectiveness ICER benchmark is reached 7.0 years postimplantation, when a projected 38% of recipients would receive MRI scans. The projected percentage of patients receiving MRI scans at 11 years was 58%, yielding an ICER of $74,221 per QALY. Henceforth, assuming increased MRI usage in regular PPM based on Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services memo CAG00399R4 and decreased cost of M-PPM, M-PPM implantation is still cost-effective, with a lifetime ICER of $49,817 per QALY. CONCLUSION: M-PPM implantation is cost-effective over the lifespan of a M-PPM based on projected usage of MRI.