1. Selective Referral Using CCTA Versus Direct Referral for Individuals Referred to Invasive Coronary Angiography for Suspected CAD: A Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label Trial.
- Author
-
Chang HJ, Lin FY, Gebow D, An HY, Andreini D, Bathina R, Baggiano A, Beltrama V, Cerci R, Choi EY, Choi JH, Choi SY, Chung N, Cole J, Doh JH, Ha SJ, Her AY, Kepka C, Kim JY, Kim JW, Kim SW, Kim W, Pontone G, Valeti U, Villines TC, Lu Y, Kumar A, Cho I, Danad I, Han D, Heo R, Lee SE, Lee JH, Park HB, Sung JM, Leflang D, Zullo J, Shaw LJ, and Min JK
- Subjects
- Aged, Asia, Coronary Artery Disease mortality, Coronary Artery Disease therapy, Europe, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, North America, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Time Factors, Computed Tomography Angiography, Coronary Angiography methods, Coronary Artery Disease diagnostic imaging, Referral and Consultation
- Abstract
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 Inc.)
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF