Cardiology imaging took big steps forward in 2016. One area that seems to be highlighted among the industry this past month has been the growing interest in moving towards expanded use of imaging techniques and risk assessments that can reduce or replace inferior or more invasive testing. As evolving health payment models take affect providers must continue to adapt from the status quo and strive to use the most appropriate imaging technology to help ensure quality outcomes in a timely manner.
The articles in this month’s roundup include studies and recommendations for both new technology and risk assessment. Read on to learn new indications for Cardiac PET, guidelines for three-dimensional echocardiography, and more.
Cardiac PET has been on the verge of mainstream for years now. As more health systems weigh the technology’s potential and guidelines shift towards PET over SPECT imaging providers will need to review their use especially in disease states SPECT cannot easily image.
This article sponsored by Medical Imaging & Technology Alliance asserts that PET imaging will thrive as payers move towards rewarding cost-effective, high-quality procedures, and both healthcare providers and patients increasingly will demand efficient, diagnostically accurate nuclear cardiology procedures with low radiation exposure.
Because of its versatility and non-invasive nature, three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) has been gaining popularity for managing treatment of patients with congenital heart disease. This statement of consensus, jointly produced by the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography, seeks to define best practices for its use.
The paper takes a comprehensive look at how 3DE works, how it is generally utilized, and what extra utility the technique promises in the future. Each section includes the two institutions’ recommendations and best practices.
In this study, researchers sought to compare the HeartMate Risk Score(HMRS) with traditional INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) classifications. The study evaluated over 10,000 patients, stratifying them into low, medium, and high risk groups based on their HMRS scores.
The results suggest that HMRS is a better predictor for patient outcomes than traditional INTERMACS profiling. Researchers stress that the results need to be corroborated in future studies, but their initial findings validate HMRS as a predictive tool.
Enterprise imaging is one way health systems can take a great stride into the future. Read Beyond Imaging: Key Components for a Holistic Enterprise Imaging Strategy to learn more.