OBJECTIVES: The use of
cardiovascular imaging is growing inexorably and concerns have been expressed about its cost and radiation safety.
METHODS: In this study, the relative environmental impact of MRI, single photon emission tomography and cardiac ultrasound (echo) for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease were examined.
RESULTS: The results emphasise that echo causes the least environmental impact at each stage of its life cycle. The effect of one echo on human health, ecosystem effects and resource use was of the order of 1-20% of those of the alternative methods.
CONCLUSIONS: Although there are circumstances in which one imaging modality is preferred on clinical grounds, when everything else is equal, these results support the selection of echocardiography as the preferred test on environmental grounds.
Imaging Institute and
Latest posts by Schoenhagen Paul (see all)
- Triple Rule Out Versus Coronary CT Angiography in Patients With Acute Chest Pain: Results From the ACIC Consortium - July 29, 2015
- The Transmural Extent and Severity of Myocardial Hypoperfusion Predicts Long-Term Outcome in NSTEMI: An MDCT Study - June 24, 2015
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging Safety in Pacemaker and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Patients: How Far Have We Come? - June 23, 2015