Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 20, 2026

Signal Acquisition, Score Interpretation, and Economics of a Non-Invasive Point-of-Care Test for Coronary Artery Disease
Published on: August 9, 2024
Economic consequences of routine coronary angiography in low- and intermediate-risk patients with unstable angina
Akshay S Desai1, Daniel H Solomon, Peter H Stone
1Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02120, USA.
Insights
Routine early invasive management for low-risk unstable angina and heart attack patients does not reduce death or heart attack risk. This approach incurs significant costs without proven mortality benefits.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Health Economics
- Clinical Practice Guidelines
Background:
- Low- and intermediate-risk patients with unstable angina pectoris (UAP) and non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (NSTEAMI) often undergo early invasive management.
- The efficacy and economic impact of this strategy in lower-risk patient groups remain unclear.
- Existing guidelines do not consistently support routine early invasive procedures for all UAP and NSTEAMI patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the economic consequences of routine early invasive management in low- and intermediate-risk UAP and NSTEAMI patients.
- To assess the cost-effectiveness of early invasive versus conservative strategies in these patient populations.
- To analyze the impact of risk stratification on treatment decisions and outcomes.
Main Methods:
- Application of a risk prediction rule to a multihospital practice database and the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Ischemia trial, phase IIIB (TIMI 3B) dataset.
- Comparison of early invasive versus conservative therapy for UAP and NSTEAMI.
- Analysis of composite endpoints including death, myocardial infarction (MI), and rehospitalization for ischemia.
- Logistic regression modeling to compare outcomes based on risk scores.
- Cost-benefit analysis of early invasive management for low- or intermediate-risk patients.
Main Results:
- In practice databases, 56% of low- or intermediate-risk UAP/NSTEAMI patients received early cardiac catheterization, despite no associated reduction in death or MI.
- In TIMI 3B, early invasive management showed superiority over conservative care at 42 days (p=0.005) and 1 year (p=0.03) when rehospitalization for ischemia was included.
- Routine invasive strategy for all low- or intermediate-risk patients in TIMI 3B could have avoided 5.4% of rehospitalizations.
- This strategy incurred an additional cost of $2,695,700, preventing 34 rehospitalizations at a cost of $79,285 per prevented hospitalization, far exceeding the $14,000 cost of rehospitalization.
Conclusions:
- Routine early invasive management of low- or intermediate-risk UAP/NSTEAMI patients generates substantial healthcare costs without improving mortality or reducing MI risk.
- The cost-effectiveness is questionable, with a high cost per prevented rehospitalization ($79,285).
- Clinical practice should align with evidence, reserving routine invasive strategies for higher-risk patients to optimize resource allocation and patient outcomes.
Abstract:
In low- and intermediate-risk patients with unstable angina pectoris (UAP) and non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (NSTEAMI), routine early invasive management with coronary angiography does not decrease the risk of death or AMI. The economic consequences of this strategy in low- and intermediate-risk patients are unknown. We applied a risk prediction rule to a multihospital practice database and to the population of the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Ischemia trial, phase IIIB (TIMI 3B), which compared early invasive with conservative therapy for UAP and NSTEAMI. We then analyzed the effect of an early invasive strategy with regard to the composite end point of death, AMI, or rehospitalization for ischemia at rest. A logistic regression model was used to compare outcomes in patients with high versus low or intermediate risk scores. The costs and benefits of early invasive management in low- or intermediate-risk patients were assessed. In the practice database, 56% of patients with UAP and NSTEAMI who had low or intermediate risk scores underwent early cardiac catheterization, although early invasive management of these lower risk patients has not been associated with a reduction in the rate of death or MI. In TIMI 3B, when rehospitalization for ischemia at rest was added to the composite end point, invasive management was superior to conservative management at 42 days (p = 0.005) and at 1 year (p = 0.03). If all low- or intermediate-risk patients randomized to conservative therapy in that trial had been treated instead with an early invasive strategy, an estimated 5.4% of rehospitalizations would have been avoided. Within TIMI 3B, such a routine invasive strategy would have resulted in an additional cost of 2,695,700 US dollars with no effect on death or AMI, but it would have led to 34 fewer rehospitalizations. This expenditure of 79,285 US dollars per hospitalization prevented far exceeds the monetary cost of rehospitalization (14,000 US dollars). Although common in clinical practice, routine early invasive management of low- or intermediate-risk patients with UAP generates substantial health-care costs without a mortality benefit or decrease in the risk of AMI. Unless the incremental benefit in quality of life from prevented rehospitalizations for UAP is judged to be worth the large incremental cost (79,285 US dollars per hospitalization prevented), such a strategy is unlikely to be cost effective.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Angina IV: Management
Angina II: Classification
Angina III: Clinical Manifestations and Assessment
Angina V: Nursing Management
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
