PURPOSE: To determine the most cost-effective strategy for preoperative imaging performed in potential living renal donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a decision-analytic model, the societal cost-effectiveness of digital subtraction angiography (DSA), gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography, contrast material-enhanced spiral computed tomographic (CT) angiography, and combinations of these imaging techniques was evaluated. Outcome measures included lifetime cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A base-case analysis was performed with a 40-year-old female donor and a 40-year-old female recipient. RESULTS: For the donor, MR angiography (24.05 QALYs and $9,000) dominated all strategies except for MR angiography with CT angiography, which had an incremental ratio of $245,000 per QALY. For the recipient, DSA and DSA with MR angiography yielded similar results (10.46 QALYs and $179,000) and dominated all other strategies. When results for donor and recipient were combined, DSA dominated all other strategies (34.51 QALYs and $188,000). If DSA was associated with a 99% specificity or less for detection of renal disease, MR angiography with CT angiography was superior (34.47 QALYs and $190,000). CONCLUSION: For preoperative imaging in a potential renal donor, DSA is the most cost-effective strategy if it has a specificity greater than 99% for detection of renal disease; otherwise, MR angiography with CT angiography is the most cost-effective strategy.

Computed tomography (CT), comparative studies, Cost-effectiveness, Digital subtraction angiography, comparative studies, Kidney, transplantation, Magnetic resonance (MR), comparative studies
dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2261011893, hdl.handle.net/1765/61410
Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam

Liem, Y.S, Kock, M.C.J.M, IJzermans, J.N.M, Weimar, W, Visser, K, & Hunink, M.G.M. (2003). Living renal donors: Optimizing the imaging strategy - Decision- and cost-effectiveness analysis. Radiology, 226(1), 53–62. doi:10.1148/radiol.2261011893