PURPOSE: To analyze the cost-utility of contrast-enhanced MR angiography (ceMRA) in the diagnosis and the planning of surgical or interventional treatment in @entity1 with peripheral @entity432 . MATERIALS AND METHODS: Additional costs and incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year for ceMRA were calculated by a decision model. The costs of ceMRA and conventional angiography were compared. Treatment was either surgery or PTA. A retrospective analysis of 24 @entity1 provided the data for the diagnostic accuracy of ceMRA. The data about quality of life assessment were taken from the literature. Costs were calculated in @entity7634 using the current fee schedule. The influence of the individual parameters on the model was estimated from a sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Per quality-adjusted life-year, ceMRA added @entity7634 ; 24,408.60 in cases undergoing radiologic intervention and @entity7634 ; 24,191.32 in cases treated surgically. CONCLUSION: Despite its high costs, ceMRA is an effective diagnostic procedure considering @entity1 benefits. Additional costs do not exceed an acceptable range.

[Cost-utility analysis of contrast-enhanced MR angiography with automated table-translation for diagnosis and therapy planning in XXXX with peripheral vascular disease].

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients', 'patient'] @entity432 :: ('MESH:D001157', 'Disease') :: ['arterial occlusive disease'] @entity7634 :: ('9319', 'Species') :: ['Euro', 'euro']
@entity1 :: (9606,Species) :: ['patients']
