Search

The aim of this study is to describe resources and outcomes of coronary computed tomography angiography plus Stress CT perfusion (CCTA ​+ ​Stress-CTP) and stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance (Stress-CMR) in symptomatic patients with suspected or known CAD. Six hundred and twenty-four consecutive symptomatic patients with intermediate to high-risk pretest likelihood for CAD or previous history of revascularization referred to our hospital for clinically indicated CCTA ​+ ​Stress-CTP or Stress-CMR were enrolled. Stress-CTP scans were performed in 223 patients while 401 patients performed Stress-CMR. Patient follow-up was performed at 1 year after index test performance. Endpoints were all cardiac events, as a combined endpoint of revascularization, non-fatal MI and death, and hard cardiac events, as combined endpoint of non-fatal MI and death. Twenty-nine percent of patients who underwent CCTA ​+ ​Stress-CTP received revascularization, 7% of subjects assessed with Stress-CMR were treated invasively, and a low number of non-fatal MI and death was observed with both strategies (hard events in 0.4% of patients that had CCTA ​+ ​Stress-CTP as index test, and in 3% of patients evaluated with Stress-CMR). According to the predefined endpoints, CCTA ​+ ​Stress-CTP group showed high rate of all cardiac events and low rate of hard cardiac events, respectively. The cumulative costs were 1970 ​± ​2506 Euro and 733 ​± ​1418 Euro for the CCTA ​+ ​Stress-CTP group and Stress-CMR group, respectively. The use of CCTA ​+ ​Stress-CTP strategy was associated with high referral to revascularization but with a favourable trend in terms of hard cardiac events and diagnostic yield in identifying individuals at lower risk of adverse events despite the presence of CAD. [Display omitted] The use of CCTA ​+ ​Stress-CTP strategy was associated with high referral to revascularization but with a protective trend in terms of hard cardiac events. Assessment with Stress-CMR is characterized by low rate of invasive referral, thus low overall management costs, but with a slightly higher risk of type I myocardial infarction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) is one of the leading cardiovascular causes of morbidity, mortality, and use of medical resources. After the introduction by international guidelines of the same level of recommendation to non-invasive imaging techniques in CCS evaluation, a large debate arose about the dilemma of choosing anatomical (with coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)) or functional imaging (with stress echocardiography (SE), cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), or nuclear imaging techniques) as a first diagnostic evaluation. The determinant role of the atherosclerotic burden in defining cardiovascular risk and prognosis more than myocardial inducible ischemia has progressively increased the use of a first anatomical evaluation with CCTA in a wide range of pre-test probability in CCS patients. Functional testing holds importance, both because the role of revascularization in symptomatic patients with proven ischemia is well defined and because functional imaging, particularly with stress cardiac magnetic resonance (s-CMR), gives further prognostic information regarding LV function, detection of myocardial viability, and tissue characterization. Emerging techniques such as stress computed tomography perfusion (s-CTP) and fractional flow reserve derived from CT (FFRCT), combining anatomical and functional evaluation, appear capable of addressing the need for a single non-invasive examination, especially in patients with high risk or previous revascularization. Furthermore, CCTA in peri-procedural planning is promising to acquire greater importance in the non-invasive planning and guiding of complex coronary revascularization procedures, both by defining the correct strategy of interventional procedure and by improving patient selection. This review explores the different roles of non-invasive imaging techniques in managing CCS patients, also providing insights into preoperative planning for percutaneous or surgical myocardial revascularization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]