Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 15, 2025
Identifying Coronary Artery Calcification on Non-gated Computed Tomography Scans
Published on: August 28, 2018
Conventional Computed Tomographic Calcium Scoring vs full chest CTCS for lung cancer screening: a cost-effectiveness
Boxiang Jiang1, Philip A Linden1, Amit Gupta2
1Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Background:
Conventional CTCS images the mid/lower chest for coronary artery disease (CAD). Because many CAD patients are also at risk for lung malignancy, CTCS often discovers incidental pulmonary nodules (IPN). CTCS excludes the upper chest, where malignancy is common. Full-chest CTCS (FCT) may be a cost-effective screening tool for IPN.
Methods:
A decision tree was created to compare a FCT to CTCS in a hypothetical patient cohort with suspected CAD. (Figure) The design compares the effects of missed cancers on CTCS with the cost of working up non-malignant nodules on FCT. The model was informed by results of the National Lung Screening Trial and literature review, including the rate of malignancy among patients receiving CTCS and the rate of malignancy in upper vs lower portions of the lung. The analysis outcomes are Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), which is generally considered beneficial when <$50,000/QALY.
Results:
Literature review suggests that rate of IPNs in the upper portion of the lung varied from 47 to 76%. Our model assumed that IPNs occur in upper and lower portions of the lung with equal frequency. The model also assumes an equal malignancy potential in upper lung IPNs despite data that malignancy occurs 61-66% in upper lung fields. In the base case analysis, a FCT will lead to an increase of 0.03 QALYs comparing to conventional CTCS (14.54 vs 14.51 QALY, respectively), which translates into an QALY increase of 16 days. The associated incremental cost for FCT is $278 ($1027 vs $748, FCT vs CTCS respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is $10,289/QALY, suggesting significant benefit. Sensitivity analysis shows this benefit increases proportional to the rate of malignancy in upper lung fields.
Conclusion:
Conventional CTCS may be a missed opportunity to screen for upper lung field cancers in high risk patients. The ICER of FCT is better than screening for breast cancer screening (mammograms $80 k/QALY) and colon cancer (colonoscopy $6 k/QALY). Prospective studies are appropriate to define protocols for FCT.
More Related Videos
06:57Author Spotlight: Advancing Cardiovascular Imaging - Introducing the Spatially Weighted Calcium Score for Early Disease Detection
Published on: September 22, 2023
06:16Signal Acquisition, Score Interpretation, and Economics of a Non-Invasive Point-of-Care Test for Coronary Artery Disease
Published on: August 9, 2024
Related Concept Videos
01:25Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System VI: Calcium -Scoring CT
01:28Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System V: CT
01:10Computed Tomography
The technique was invented in the 1970s and is based on the principle that as X-rays pass through the body, they are absorbed or reflected at different levels. In the technique, a patient lies on a motorized platform while a computerized axial tomography (CAT) scanner rotates...
01:30Radiological Investigation I: X-ray and CT
01:27Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography
01:20Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System III: X-Ray
Definition and Purpose
An X-ray, or radiograph, is a non-invasive method that uses ionizing radiation to take images of internal structures. It is mainly used in cardiac imaging to examine the heart, lungs, and major blood vessels, aiming to identify abnormalities in the heart's size, shape, and position, such as heart failure, congenital defects, and vascular...