The aim of this study was to analyse the costs of different diagnostic approaches to patients with acute flank pain. Four different diagnostic approaches were considered: (a) spiral CT without contrast medium (CM); (b) plain film, ultrasonography (US) and intravenous urography (IVU)--the latter procedure is used in our department in cases still unsolved following the former investigations (28% in our experience); (c) plain film, US and spiral CT without CM (as an alternative to IVU in 28% of cases); and (d) IVU. The cost of each procedure in a university hospital was calculated, following analysis of the differential costs of each investigation (equipment, depreciation and maintenance costs, related materials and services, radiologists, radiographers, nurses) and their common costs (auxiliary personnel and indirect internal costs). Finally, we calculated the full cost of each procedure and applied it to the different diagnostic approaches. The full cost of each approach was: (a) spiral CT without CM = 74 Euro; (b) plain film, US and IVU (28%) = 66.89 Euro; (c) plain film, US and spiral CT without CM (28%) = 64.93 Euro; (d) IVU = 80.90 Euro. Intravenous urography alone or in unsolved cases is not to be considered because it provides higher costs and worse diagnostic results, whereas X-ray dose to patient is almost equal between IVU and spiral CT. Spiral CT integrated to plain film and US in unsolved cases could be preferred because of lower cost and dose to patient, though reaching a diagnostic conclusion may take longer than an immediate spiral CT.

ObjectivesTo evaluate diagnostic imaging costs before and after DTS implementation in patients with suspected thoracic lesions on CXR.MethodsFour hundred sixty-five patients (263 male, 202 female; age, 72.47 ± 11.33 years) with suspected thoracic lesion(s) after CXR underwent DTS. Each patient underwent CT when a pulmonary non-calcified lesion was identified by DTS while CT was not performed when a benign pulmonary or extrapulmonary lesion or pseudolesion was identified. The average per-patient imaging cost was calculated by normalising the costs before and after DTS implementation.ResultsIn 229/465 patients who underwent DTS after suspicious CXR, DTS showed 193 pulmonary lesions and 36 pleural lesions, while in the remaining 236/465 patients, lesions were ruled out as pseudolesions of CXR. Chest CT examination was performed in 127/465 (27 %) patients while in the remaining 338/465 patients (73 %) CXR doubtful findings were resolved by DTS. The average per-patient costs of CXR, DTS and CT were €15.15, 41.55 and 113.66. DTS allowed an annual cost saving of €8,090.2 considering unenhanced CT and €19,298.12 considering contrast-enhanced CT. Considering a DTS reimbursement rate of € 62.7 the break even point corresponds to 479 DTS examinations.ConclusionPer-patient diagnostic imaging costs decreased after DTS implementation in patients with suspected thoracic lesions.Main Messages• Digital tomosynthesis improves the diagnostic accuracy and confidence in chest radiography• Digital tomosynthesis reduces the need for CT for a suspected pulmonary lesion• Digital tomosynthesis requires a dose level equivalent to that of around two chest radiographies• Digital tomosynthesis produces a significant per-patient saving in diagnostic imaging costs

MDCT coronary angiography has far lower costs than conventional coronary angiography, and its cost-effectiveness is better in the large majority of patients.

The basic pathological feature for the differential diagnosis between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and non-malignant hepatocellular nodules in cirrhotic patients detected during ultrasound (US) is the vascular supply to the nodule. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are considered reference imaging techniques for depicting hepatocellular nodule vascularity in the noninvasive diagnosis of HCC. Contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) improves the diagnostic performance of unenhanced US in the diagnosis of HCC, giving an overall diagnostic accuracy that is similar to that of CT, even for nodules smaller than 2 cm. An additional diagnostic feature of CEUS relative to CT is the possibility to visualize contrast wash-in to hepatic nodules during the arterial phase and contrast washout during the portal venous and late phases. Sensitivity for the diagnosis of HCC with combined assessment of CEUS and CT is higher than for separate assessments of CEUS and CT due to the reduction of false-negative findings. CEUS represents a competitive imaging method from an economic point of view, and is an effective imaging tool for assessing the therapeutic outcome after surgery, ablation therapy, and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).

PurposeThis study was done to assess the clinical-diagnostic impact and cost of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) versus computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the characterisation of focal liver lesions.Materials and methodsCEUS with sulphur hexafluoride-filled microbubbles (SonoVue bolus 2.4 ml) was performed in 157 patients with 160 focal liver lesions identified by other diagnostic techniques. CEUS images were obtained during the arterial (15 to 35 s from contrast injection), portal venous (40 to 70 s) and late phase (up to 300 s from microbubble injection). Contrast-enhanced CT was performed with a 64-row multidetector CT. MRI was performed before and after administration of the liver-specific contrast agent gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA). A patient-by-patient activity-based cost analysis was performed.ResultsCEUS led to a change in the diagnostic workup in 131/157 patients (83.4 %) and in the therapeutic workup in 93/157 patients (59.2 %). CEUS allowed for the final diagnosis to be established in 133/157 patients (84.7 %). The full cost of CEUS was lower than that of contrast-enhanced CT and MR imaging.ConclusionsCEUS determined a change in the diagnostic and therapeutic workup in the characterisation of focal liver lesions and reduced the full costs of the diagnostic process.Main messages:• CEUS allows a correct diagnosis in more than 80 % of focal liver lesions.• CEUS has a significant impact on the diagnosis of focal liver lesions.• CEUS examination of focal liver lesions reduces total costs.• Dynamic MR with hepato-specific contrast medium remains the reference standard for lesion characterisation.• CEUS is low-cost, versatile and accurate in the characterisation of focal liver lesions.