Journal
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 67, Issue 15, Pages 1759-1768Publisher
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.02.026
Keywords
angina pectoris; invasive coronary angiography; myocardial infarction; preventive therapy
Categories
Funding
- Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates [CZH/4/588]
- Edinburgh and Lothian Health Foundation Trust
- Heart Diseases Research Fund
- National Health Service Research Scotland (NRS) through National Health Service Lothian Health Board
- NRS
- British Heart Foundation [FS/11/014, CH/09/002]
- Abbott Diagnostics
- NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
- AstraZeneca
- Novartis
- Scottish Imaging Network: A Platform of Scientific Excellence (SINAPSE)
- Barts Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit - National Institute for Health Research
- Wellcome Trust Senior Investigator Award [WT103782AIA]
- Chief Scientist Office [CZH/4/588] Funding Source: researchfish
- Medical Research Council [MR/K006584/1] Funding Source: researchfish
- MRC [MR/N003403/1] Funding Source: UKRI
Ask authors/readers for more resources
BACKGROUND In a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial, 4,146 patients were randomized to receive standard care or standard care plus coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to explore the consequences of CCTA-assisted diagnosis on invasive coronary angiography, preventive treatments, and clinical outcomes. METHODS In post hoc analyses, we assessed changes in invasive coronary angiography, preventive treatments, and clinical outcomes using national electronic health records. RESULTS Despite similar overall rates (409 vs. 401; p = 0.451), invasive angiography was less likely to demonstrate normal coronary arteries (20 vs. 56; hazard ratios [HRs]: 0.39 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.23 to 0.68]; p < 0.001) but more likely to show obstructive coronary artery disease (283 vs. 230; HR: 1.29 [95% CI: 1.08 to 1.55]; p = 0.005) in those allocated to CCTA. More preventive therapies (283 vs. 74; HR: 4.03 [95% CI: 3.12 to 5.20]; p < 0.001) were initiated after CCTA, with each drug commencing at a median of 48 to 52 days after clinic attendance. From the median time for preventive therapy initiation (50 days), fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction was halved in patients allocated to CCTA compared with those assigned to standard care (17 vs. 34; HR: 0.50 [95% CI: 0.28 to 0.88]; p = 0.020). Cumulative 6-month costs were slightly higher with CCTA: difference $462 (95% CI: $303 to $621). CONCLUSIONS In patients with suspected angina due to coronary heart disease, CCTA leads to more appropriate use of invasive angiography and alterations in preventive therapies that were associated with a halving of fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction. (Scottish COmputed Tomography of the HEART Trial [SCOT-HEART]; NCT01149590) (C) 2016 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available