Aims The role of pre-participation screening (PPS) modalities in preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in athletes is debated due to a high false-positive rate. Focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) has shown higher sensitivity and specificity, but its cost-effectiveness remains uncertain. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic performance and cost-effectiveness of FoCUS use in PPS.Methods and results A total of 2111 athletes (77.4% male, mean age 24.9 +/- 15.2years) underwent standardized family and medical history collection, physical examination, resting electrocardiography (ECG), FoCUS (10 min/5 views protocol), comprehensive echocardiography and exercise stress test. We prospectively evaluated three PPS incremental models: Model A, standardized medical history and physical examination Model B, Model A plus resting and stress ECG and Model C, Model B plus FoCUS (10 min/5 views protocol). We determined their incremental diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness ratio. A total of 30 athletes were diagnosed with a cardiac condition associated with SCD: 3 were identified by Model A, 14 by Model B, and 13 athletes by Model C. The introduction of FoCUS markedly increased the sensitivity of PPS, compared with Model A and Model B (sensitivity 94% vs. 19% vs. 58% specificity 93% vs. 93% vs. 92%). The total screening costs were as follows: Model A 35.64 euros, Model B 87.68 euros, and Model C 120.89 euros. Considering the sole conditions at risk of SCD, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 135.62 euros for Model B and 114.31 for Model C.Conclusions The implementation of FoCUS into the PPS allows to identify a significantly greater number of athletes at risk of SCD and markedly lowers the false negative rate. Furthermore, the incorporation of FoCUS into the screening process has shown to be cost-effective.A significant electrocardiography false-positive rate makes pre-participation screening (PPS) for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in athletes controversial. Focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) may increase sensitivity and specificity however, its cost-effectiveness is unknown. This study evaluates the diagnostic performance and cost-effectiveness of FoCUS in PPS.Incorporating a simplified echocardiographic exam called FoCUS into PPS resulted in higher diagnostic reliability, with a lower rate of false negatives and a higher number of athletes at risk for SCD identified.The integration of FoCUS into the screening process resulted to be cost-effective in our athletes' cohort.Graphical Abstract
Cost-effectiveness and diagnostic accuracy of focused cardiac ultrasound in the pre-participation screening of athletes: the SPORT-FoCUS study / G. Halasz, B. Capelli, A. Nardecchia, M. Cattaneo, T. Cassina, V. Biasini, D. Barbieri, M. Villa, M. Beltrami, F. Perone, M. Villani, M. Badini, F. Gervasi, M. Piepoli, G. Via. - In: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE CARDIOLOGY. - ISSN 2047-4873. - 30:16(2023 Nov), pp. 1748-1757. [10.1093/eurjpc/zwad287]
Cost-effectiveness and diagnostic accuracy of focused cardiac ultrasound in the pre-participation screening of athletes: the SPORT-FoCUS study
F. Gervasi;M. Piepoli;
2023
Abstract
Aims The role of pre-participation screening (PPS) modalities in preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in athletes is debated due to a high false-positive rate. Focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) has shown higher sensitivity and specificity, but its cost-effectiveness remains uncertain. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic performance and cost-effectiveness of FoCUS use in PPS.Methods and results A total of 2111 athletes (77.4% male, mean age 24.9 +/- 15.2years) underwent standardized family and medical history collection, physical examination, resting electrocardiography (ECG), FoCUS (10 min/5 views protocol), comprehensive echocardiography and exercise stress test. We prospectively evaluated three PPS incremental models: Model A, standardized medical history and physical examination Model B, Model A plus resting and stress ECG and Model C, Model B plus FoCUS (10 min/5 views protocol). We determined their incremental diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness ratio. A total of 30 athletes were diagnosed with a cardiac condition associated with SCD: 3 were identified by Model A, 14 by Model B, and 13 athletes by Model C. The introduction of FoCUS markedly increased the sensitivity of PPS, compared with Model A and Model B (sensitivity 94% vs. 19% vs. 58% specificity 93% vs. 93% vs. 92%). The total screening costs were as follows: Model A 35.64 euros, Model B 87.68 euros, and Model C 120.89 euros. Considering the sole conditions at risk of SCD, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 135.62 euros for Model B and 114.31 for Model C.Conclusions The implementation of FoCUS into the PPS allows to identify a significantly greater number of athletes at risk of SCD and markedly lowers the false negative rate. Furthermore, the incorporation of FoCUS into the screening process has shown to be cost-effective.A significant electrocardiography false-positive rate makes pre-participation screening (PPS) for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in athletes controversial. Focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) may increase sensitivity and specificity however, its cost-effectiveness is unknown. This study evaluates the diagnostic performance and cost-effectiveness of FoCUS in PPS.Incorporating a simplified echocardiographic exam called FoCUS into PPS resulted in higher diagnostic reliability, with a lower rate of false negatives and a higher number of athletes at risk for SCD identified.The integration of FoCUS into the screening process resulted to be cost-effective in our athletes' cohort.Graphical Abstract| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
zwad287.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
845.81 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
845.81 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.




