Search

ObjectivesPredicting the presence or absence of coronary artery disease (CAD) is clinically important. Pretest probability (PTP) and CAD consortium clinical (CAD2) model and risk scores used in the guidelines are not sufficiently accurate as the only guidance for applying invasive testing or discharging a patient. Artificial intelligence without the need of additional non-invasive testing is not yet used in this context, as previous results of the model are promising, but available in high-risk population only. Still, validation in low-risk patients, which is clinically most relevant, is lacking.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingSecondary outpatient clinic care in one Dutch academic hospital.ParticipantsWe included 696 patients referred from primary care for further testing regarding the presence or absence of CAD. The results were compared with PTP and CAD2 using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (area under the curve (AUC)). CAD was defined by a coronary stenosis >50% in at least one coronary vessel in invasive coronary or CT angiography, or having a coronary event within 6 months.Outcome measuresThe first cohort validating the memetic pattern-based algorithm (MPA) model developed in two high-risk populations in a low-risk to intermediate-risk cohort to improve risk stratification for non-invasive diagnosis of the presence or absence of CAD.ResultsThe population contained 49% male, average age was 65.6±12.6 years. 16.2% had CAD. The AUCs of the MPA model, the PTP and the CAD2 were 0.87, 0.80, and 0.82, respectively. Applying the MPA model resulted in possible discharge of 67.7% of the patients with an acceptable CAD rate of 4.2%.ConclusionsIn this low-risk to intermediate-risk population, the MPA model provides a good risk stratification of presence or absence of CAD with a better ROC compared with traditional risk scores. The results are promising but need prospective confirmation.

BACKGROUND: Known coronary artery disease (CAD) risk scores (e.g., Framingham) estimate the CAD-related event risk rather than presence/absence of CAD. Artificial intelligence (AI) is rarely used in this context. AIMS: This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic power of AI (memetic pattern-based algorithm (MPA)) in CAD and to expand its applicability to a broader patient population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Nine hundred eighty-seven patients of the Ludwigshafen Risk and Cardiovascular Health Study (LURIC) were divided into a training (n = 493) and a test population (n = 494). They were evaluated by the Basel MPA. The “training population” was further used to expand and optimize the Basel MPA, and after modifications, a final validation was carried out on the “test population.” The results were compared with the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) using receiver operating curves (ROC; area-under-the-curve (AUC)). Of the 987 LURIC patients, 71% were male, age 62 ± 11 years and 68% had documented CAD. AUC of Framingham and BASEL MPA to diagnose CAD in “LURIC training” were 0.69 and 0.80, respectively. AUC of the optimized MPA in the training and test cohort were 0.88 and 0.87, respectively. The positive predictive values (PPV) of the optimized MPA for exclusion of CAD in “training” and “test” were 98 and 95%, respectively. The PPV of MPA for identification of CAD was 93 and 94%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The successful use of the MPA approach has been demonstrated in a broad-risk spectrum of patients undergoing CAD evaluation, as an element of predictive, preventive, personalized medicine, and may be used instead of further non-invasive diagnostic procedures.