Dataset Information

Early computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome: randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To establish if the use of early computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography improves one year clinical outcomes in patients presenting to the emergency department with acute chest pain and at intermediate risk of acute coronary syndrome and subsequent clinical events.

Design

Randomised controlled trial.

Setting

37 hospitals in the UK.

Participants

Adults with suspected or a provisional diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome and one or more of previous coronary heart disease, raised levels of cardiac troponin, or abnormal electrocardiogram.

Interventions

Early CT coronary angiography and standard of care compared with standard of care only.

Main outcome measures

Primary endpoint was all cause death or subsequent type 1 or 4b myocardial infarction at one year.

Results

Between 23 March 2015 and 27 June 2019, 1748 participants (mean age 62 years (standard deviation 13), 64% men, mean global registry of acute coronary events (GRACE) score 115 (standard deviation 35)) were randomised to receive early CT coronary angiography (n=877) or standard of care only (n=871). Median time from randomisation to CT coronary angiography was 4.2 (interquartile range 1.6-21.6) hours. The primary endpoint occurred in 51 (5.8%) participants randomised to CT coronary angiography and 53 (6.1%) participants who received standard of care only (adjusted hazard ratio 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.62 to 1.35), P=0.65). Invasive coronary angiography was performed in 474 (54.0%) participants randomised to CT coronary angiography and 530 (60.8%) participants who received standard of care only (adjusted hazard ratio 0.81 (0.72 to 0.92), P=0.001). There were no overall differences in coronary revascularisation, use of drug treatment for acute coronary syndrome, or subsequent preventive treatments between the two groups. Early CT coronary angiography was associated with a slightly longer time in hospital (median increase 0.21 (95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.40) days from a median hospital stay of 2.0 to 2.2 days).

Conclusions

In intermediate risk patients with acute chest pain and suspected acute coronary syndrome, early CT coronary angiography did not alter overall coronary therapeutic interventions or one year clinical outcomes, but reduced rates of invasive angiography while modestly increasing length of hospital stay. These findings do not support the routine use of early CT coronary angiography in intermediate risk patients with acute chest pain and suspected acute coronary syndrome.

Trial registration

ISRCTN19102565, NCT02284191.

SUBMITTER: Gray AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8479591 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsCoronary computed tomography angiography is increasingly employed in the emergency department for suspected acute coronary syndrome patients. The HEART score has been proposed for initial risk stratification in these patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value and efficiency of the HEART score before coronary computed tomography angiography.Methods and resultsWe included patients suspected of acute coronary syndrome who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography in the emergency department. Based on the HEART score, patients were stratified as low-risk (HEART≤3), intermediate-risk (HEART4-6) and high-risk (HEART≥7). We assessed coronary computed tomography angiography for the presence of significant coronary artery disease (>50% stenosis). The primary outcome, the level of major adverse cardiac events, was a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularisation within 30 days. The study population consisted of 340 patients (mean age: 55.6±10.1 years, 44.7% women), major adverse cardiac events occurred in 45 (13.2%) patients. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events in patients stratified as low-risk (35.0%), intermediate-risk (56.8%) and high-risk (8.2%) was 3.4%, 12.4% and 60.7%, respectively. All four low-risk patients with major adverse cardiac events had a HEART score of three. An algorithm where coronary computed tomography angiography is reserved for patients with HEART 3-6 resulted in a sensitivity of 97.8%, specificity of 84.1%, negative predictive value of 99.6% and positive predictive value of 48.4%, while reducing the need for coronary computed tomography angiography by 22% (n=75).ConclusionThe predictive value of coronary computed tomography angiography for 30-day major adverse cardiac events in suspected acute coronary syndrome patients is good, and reserving coronary computed tomography angiography for HEART score 3-6 patients reduces the number of needed coronary computed tomography angiograms without affecting diagnostic accuracy.

Project description:Background High-risk plaque (HRP) features as detected by coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) predict acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We sought to determine whether coronary CTA-specific definitions of HRP improve discrimination of patients with ACS as compared with definitions from intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). Methods and Results In patients with suspected ACS, randomized to coronary CTA in the ROMICAT II (Rule Out Myocardial Infarction/Ischemia Using Computer Assisted Tomography II) trial, we retrospectively performed semiautomated quantitative analysis of HRP (including remodeling index, plaque burden as derived by plaque area, low computed tomography attenuation plaque volume) and degree of luminal stenosis and analyzed the performance of traditional IVUS thresholds to detect ACS. Furthermore, we derived CTA-specific thresholds in patients with ACS to detect culprit lesions and applied those to all patients to calculate the discriminatory ability to detect ACS in comparison to IVUS thresholds. Of 472 patients, 255 patients (56±7.8 years; 63% men) had coronary plaque. In 32 patients (6.8%) with ACS, culprit plaques (n=35) differed from nonculprit plaques (n=172) with significantly greater values for all HRP features except minimal luminal area (significantly lower; all P<0.01). IVUS definitions showed good performance while minimal luminal area (odds ratio: 6.82; P=0.014) and plaque burden (odds ratio: 5.71; P=0.008) were independently associated with ACS but not remodeling index (odds ratio: 0.78; P=0.673). Optimized CTA-specific thresholds for plaque burden (area under the curve: 0.832 versus 0.676) and degree of stenosis (area under the curve: 0.826 versus 0.721) showed significantly higher diagnostic performance for ACS as compared with IVUS-based thresholds (all P<0.05) with borderline significance for minimal luminal area (area under the curve: 0.817 versus 0.742; P=0.066). Conclusions CTA-specific definitions of HRP features may improve the discrimination of patients with ACS as compared with IVUS-based definitions. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01084239.

Project description:ImportanceCoronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is a new approach for the diagnosis of anatomical coronary artery disease (CAD), but it is unclear how CCTA performs compared with the standard approach of functional stress testing.ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effectiveness of CCTA with that of functional stress testing for patients with suspected CAD.Data sourcesA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and MEDLINE for English-language randomized clinical trials of CCTA published from January 1, 2000, to July 10, 2016.Study selectionResearchers selected randomized clinical trials that compared a primary strategy of CCTA with that of functional stress testing for patients with suspected CAD and reported data on patient clinical events and changes in therapy.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently extracted data from and assessed the quality of the trials. This analysis followed the PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses and used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to conduct the primary analysis. Summary relative risks were calculated with a random-effects model.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, cardiac hospitalization, myocardial infarction, invasive coronary angiography, coronary revascularization, new CAD diagnoses, and change in prescription for aspirin and statins.ResultsThirteen trials were included, with 10 315 patients in the CCTA arm and 9777 patients in the functional stress testing arm who were followed up for a mean duration of 18 months. There were no statistically significant differences between CCTA and functional stress testing in death (1.0% vs 1.1%; risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.71-1.21) or cardiac hospitalization (2.7% vs 2.7%; RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.21), but CCTA was associated with a reduction in the incidence of myocardial infarction (0.7% vs 1.1%; RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.96). Patients undergoing CCTA were significantly more likely to undergo invasive coronary angiography (11.7% vs 9.1%; RR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.59) and revascularization (7.2% vs 4.5%; RR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.43-2.43). They were also more likely to receive a diagnosis of new CAD and to have initiated aspirin or statin therapy.Conclusions and relevanceCompared with functional stress testing, CCTA is associated with a reduced incidence of myocardial infarction but an increased incidence of invasive coronary angiography, revascularization, CAD diagnoses, and new prescriptions for aspirin and statins. Despite these differences, CCTA is not associated with a reduction in mortality or cardiac hospitalizations.

Project description:OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether invasive coronary angiography or computed tomography (CT) should be performed in patients clinically referred for coronary angiography with an intermediate probability of coronary artery disease. DESIGN: Prospective randomised single centre trial. SETTING: University hospital in Germany. PARTICIPANTS: 340 patients with suspected coronary artery disease and a clinical indication for coronary angiography on the basis of atypical angina or chest pain. INTERVENTIONS: 168 patients were randomised to CT and 172 to coronary angiography. After randomisation one patient declined CT and 10 patients declined coronary angiography, leaving 167 patients (88 women) and 162 patients (78 women) for analysis. Allocation could not be blinded, but blinded independent investigators assessed outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome measure was major procedural complications within 48 hours of the last procedure related to CT or angiography. RESULTS: Cardiac CT reduced the need for coronary angiography from 100% to 14% (95% confidence interval 9% to 20%, P<0.001) and was associated with a significantly greater diagnostic yield from coronary angiography: 75% (53% to 90%) v 15% (10% to 22%), P<0.001. Major procedural complications were uncommon (0.3%) and similar across groups. Minor procedural complications were less common in the CT group than in the coronary angiography group: 3.6% (1% to 8%) v 10.5% (6% to 16%), P=0.014. CT shortened the median length of stay in the angiography group from 52.9 hours (interquartile range 49.5-76.4 hours) to 30.0 hours (3.5-77.3 hours, P<0.001). Overall median exposure to radiation was similar between the CT and angiography groups: 5.0 mSv (interquartile range 4.2-8.7 mSv) v 6.4 mSv (3.4-10.7 mSv), P=0.45. After a median follow-up of 3.3 years, major adverse cardiovascular events had occurred in seven of 167 patients in the CT group (4.2%) and six of 162 (3.7%) in the coronary angiography group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.30 to 2.69, P=0.86). 79% of patients stated that they would prefer CT for subsequent testing. The study was conducted at a University hospital in Germany and thus the performance of CT may be different in routine clinical practice. The prevalence was lower than expected, resulting in an underpowered study for the predefined primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: CT increased the diagnostic yield and was a safe gatekeeper for coronary angiography with no increase in long term events. The length of stay was shortened by 22.9 hours with CT, and patients preferred non-invasive testing.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00844220.