Selective Referral Using CCTA Versus Direct Referral for Individuals Referred to Invasive Coronary Angiography for Suspected CAD A Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label Trial

  • Chang, Hyuk-Jae
  • Lin, Fay Y.
  • Gebow, Dan
  • An, Hae Young
  • Andreini, Daniele
  • ... Kim, Jin-Won
  • 외 33명
Citations

WEB OF SCIENCE

134
Citations

SCOPUS

145

초록

OBJECTIVES This study compared the safety and diagnostic yield of a selective referral strategy using coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) compared with a direct referral strategy using invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the index procedure. BACKGROUND Among patients presenting with signs and symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease (CAD), a sizeable proportion who are referred to ICA do not have a significant, obstructive stenosis. METHODS In a multinational, randomized clinical trial of patients referred to ICA for nonemergent indications, a selective referral strategy was compared with a direct referral strategy. The primary endpoint was noninferiority with a multiplicative margin of 1.33 of composite major adverse cardiovascular events (blindly adjudicated death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, stroke, urgent and/or emergent coronary revascularization or cardiac hospitalization) at a median follow-up of 1-year. RESULTS At 22 sites, 823 subjects were randomized to a selective referral and 808 to a direct referral strategy. At 1 year, selective referral met the noninferiority margin of 1.33 (p = 0.026) with a similar event rate between the randomized arms of the trial (4.6% vs. 4.6%; hazard ratio: 0.99; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 1.47). Following CCTA, only 23% of the selective referral arm went on to ICA, which was a rate lower than that of the direct referral strategy. Coronary revascularization occurred less often in the selective referral group compared with the direct referral to ICA (13% vs. 18%; p < 0.001). Rates of normal ICA were 24.6% in the selective referral arm compared with 61.1% in the direct referral arm of the trial (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In stable patients with suspected CAD who are eligible for ICA, the comparable 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events rates following a selective referral and direct referral strategy suggests that both diagnostic approaches are similarly effective. In the selective referral strategy, the reduced use of ICA was associated with a greater diagnostic yield, which supported the usefulness of CCTA as an efficient and accurate method to guide decisions of ICA performance. (Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography for Selective Cardiac Catheterization [CONSERVE]; NCT01810198) Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

키워드

coronary computed tomographic angiographyinvasive coronary angiographymajor adverse cardiac eventsstable ischemic heart diseaseCOMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHYAMERICAN-HEART-ASSOCIATIONDIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCEARTERY-DISEASETASK-FORCEEXPOSURECATHETERIZATIONGUIDELINESCARDIOLOGYRADIATION
제목
Selective Referral Using CCTA Versus Direct Referral for Individuals Referred to Invasive Coronary Angiography for Suspected CAD A Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label Trial
저자
Chang, Hyuk-JaeLin, Fay Y.Gebow, DanAn, Hae YoungAndreini, DanieleBathina, RaviBaggiano, AndreaBeltrama, VirginiaCerci, RodrigoChoi, Eui-YoungChoi, Jung-HyunChoi, So-YeonChung, NamsikCole, JasonDoh, Joon-HyungHa, Sang-JinHer, Ae-YoungKepka, CezaryKim, Jang-YoungKim, Jin-WonKim, Sang-WookKim, WoongPontone, GianlucaValeti, UmaVillines, Todd C.Lu, YaoKumar, AmitCho, IksungDanad, IbrahimHan, DongheeHeo, RanLee, Sang-EunLee, Ji HyunPark, Hyung-BokSung, Ji-minLeflang, DavidZullo, JosephShaw, Leslee J.Min, James K.
DOI
10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.09.018
발행일
2019-07
유형
Article
저널명
JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging
12
7
페이지
1303 ~ 1312