Background: CMR has recently emerged as a robust and reliable technique to assess coronary artery disease (CAD). A negative perfusion CMR test predicts low event rates of 0.3-0.5%/year. Invasive coronary angiography (CA) remains the "gold standard" for the evaluation of CAD in many countries.Objective: Assessing the costs of the two strategies in the European CMR registry for the work-up of known or suspected CAD from a health care payer perspective. Strategy 1) a CA to all patients or 2) a CA only to patients who are diagnosed positive for ischemia in a prior CMR.Method and results: Using data of the European CMR registry (20 hospitals, 11'040 consecutive patients) we calculated the proportion of patients who were diagnosed positive (20.6%), uncertain (6.5%), and negative (72.9%) after the CMR test in patients with known or suspected CAD (n=2'717). No other medical test was performed to patients who were negative for ischemia. Positive diagnosed patients had a coronary angiography. Those with uncertain diagnosis had additional tests (84.7%: stress echocardiography, 13.1%: CCT, 2.3% SPECT), these costs were added to the CMR strategy costs. Information from costs for tests in Germany and Switzerland were used. A sensibility analysis was performed for inpatient CA. For costs see figure. Results - costs.Discussion: The CMR strategy costs less than the CA strategy for the health insurance systems both, in Germany and Switzerland. While lower in costs, the CMR strategy is a non-invasive one, does not expose to radiation, and yields additional information on cardiac function, viability, valves, and great vessels. Developing the use of CMR instead of CA might imply some reduction in costs together with superior patient safety and comfort, and a better utilization of resources at the hospital level. Document introduit le : 01.12.2011