Structural heart disease screening using artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram and novice handheld cardiac ultrasound: a cost analysis.

IF 4.3
European heart journal open Pub Date : 2026-03-30 eCollection Date: 2026-03-01 DOI:10.1093/ehjopen/oeag049
Reid P Schlesinger, Francisco B Alexandrino, Eunjung Lee, Abhishek J Deshmukh, Vuyisile T Nkomo, Jae K Oh, Peter A Noseworthy, Patricia A Pellikka, Attia Zachi, Francisco Lopez-Jimenez, Paul A Friedman, Garvan C Kane, Sorin V Pislaru, Jared Bird, Gal Tsaban
{"title":"Structural heart disease screening using artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram and novice handheld cardiac ultrasound: a cost analysis.","authors":"Reid P Schlesinger, Francisco B Alexandrino, Eunjung Lee, Abhishek J Deshmukh, Vuyisile T Nkomo, Jae K Oh, Peter A Noseworthy, Patricia A Pellikka, Attia Zachi, Francisco Lopez-Jimenez, Paul A Friedman, Garvan C Kane, Sorin V Pislaru, Jared Bird, Gal Tsaban","doi":"10.1093/ehjopen/oeag049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Early detection of structural heart disease (SHD) improves patient outcomes. However, population-based screening is not recommended due to the lack of accurate and cost-effective tools. We evaluated the costs of artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram (AI-ECG) alone vs. AI-ECG followed by handheld cardiac ultrasound (HCU) for SHD screening.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>We performed a model-based cost analysis using data from 286 adult patients who underwent ECG and same-day HCU performed by a novice operator. Transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) was the reference standard. We compared two screening strategies: (i) AI-ECG alone and (ii) a stepwise approach (AI-ECG followed by HCU). We assessed costs per diagnosis of aortic stenosis (AS), increased left ventricular wall thickness (ILVWT), and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). Sensitivity analyses were conducted for varying disease prevalence. The stepwise approach decreased the cost per diagnosis of AS from $6386 (AI-ECG alone) to $2746 (57.0% savings), ILVWT from $4448 to $2895 (34.9% savings), and LVSD from $1469 to $1296 (11.8% savings). Overall, the cost per diagnosis for all SHDs combined decreased from $1940 to $1570 (19.1% savings). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that cost savings were inversely proportional to disease prevalence. Nevertheless, stepwise screening remained cost-saving compared with AI-ECG alone until prevalence exceeded ∼55.9% for AS, 28.9% for ILVWT, 20.7% for LVSD, and 40.8% for all SHDs combined.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A stepwise screening strategy incorporating HCU after a positive AI-ECG reduces the immediate costs of SHD detection by minimizing unnecessary TTEs. This approach may enhance the feasibility of population-based SHD screening, particularly in lower-prevalence settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":93995,"journal":{"name":"European heart journal open","volume":"6 2","pages":"oeag049"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13069988/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European heart journal open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjopen/oeag049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Early detection of structural heart disease (SHD) improves patient outcomes. However, population-based screening is not recommended due to the lack of accurate and cost-effective tools. We evaluated the costs of artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram (AI-ECG) alone vs. AI-ECG followed by handheld cardiac ultrasound (HCU) for SHD screening.

Methods and results: We performed a model-based cost analysis using data from 286 adult patients who underwent ECG and same-day HCU performed by a novice operator. Transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) was the reference standard. We compared two screening strategies: (i) AI-ECG alone and (ii) a stepwise approach (AI-ECG followed by HCU). We assessed costs per diagnosis of aortic stenosis (AS), increased left ventricular wall thickness (ILVWT), and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). Sensitivity analyses were conducted for varying disease prevalence. The stepwise approach decreased the cost per diagnosis of AS from $6386 (AI-ECG alone) to $2746 (57.0% savings), ILVWT from $4448 to $2895 (34.9% savings), and LVSD from $1469 to $1296 (11.8% savings). Overall, the cost per diagnosis for all SHDs combined decreased from $1940 to $1570 (19.1% savings). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that cost savings were inversely proportional to disease prevalence. Nevertheless, stepwise screening remained cost-saving compared with AI-ECG alone until prevalence exceeded ∼55.9% for AS, 28.9% for ILVWT, 20.7% for LVSD, and 40.8% for all SHDs combined.

Conclusion: A stepwise screening strategy incorporating HCU after a positive AI-ECG reduces the immediate costs of SHD detection by minimizing unnecessary TTEs. This approach may enhance the feasibility of population-based SHD screening, particularly in lower-prevalence settings.

使用人工智能心电图和新手手持式心脏超声进行结构性心脏病筛查:成本分析。
目的:早期发现结构性心脏病(SHD)可改善患者预后。然而,由于缺乏准确和具有成本效益的工具,不建议进行基于人群的筛查。我们评估了人工智能心电图(AI-ECG)单独与AI-ECG随后手持式心脏超声(HCU)筛查SHD的成本。方法和结果:我们使用286名成年患者的数据进行了基于模型的成本分析,这些患者接受了心电图和由新手操作的当日HCU。经胸超声心动图(TTE)为参考标准。我们比较了两种筛查策略:(i)单独使用AI-ECG和(ii)逐步方法(AI-ECG随后使用HCU)。我们评估了主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)、左室壁厚度增加(ILVWT)和左室收缩功能障碍(LVSD)的诊断成本。对不同的疾病患病率进行敏感性分析。逐步方法将AS的每次诊断费用从6386美元(单独AI-ECG)降低到2746美元(节省57.0%),ILVWT从4448美元降低到2895美元(节省34.9%),LVSD从1469美元降低到1296美元(节省11.8%)。总的来说,所有SHDs的每次诊断费用从1940美元下降到1570美元(节省19.1%)。敏感性分析表明,成本节约与疾病患病率成反比。然而,与单独的AI-ECG相比,逐步筛查仍然节省成本,直到AS的患病率超过55.9%,ILVWT的患病率超过28.9%,LVSD的患病率超过20.7%,所有SHDs合并的患病率超过40.8%。结论:在AI-ECG阳性后采用HCU逐步筛查策略,通过减少不必要的te,可以减少SHD检测的即时成本。这种方法可以提高基于人群的SHD筛查的可行性,特别是在低患病率的环境中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书