TY - JOUR
T1 - Selective Referral Using CCTA Versus Direct Referral for Individuals Referred to Invasive Coronary Angiography for Suspected CAD: A Randomized, Controlled, Open-Label Trial
AU - Chang, Hyuk-Jae
AU - Lin, Fay Y.
AU - Gebow, Dan
AU - An, Hae Young
AU - Andreini, Daniele
AU - Bathina, Ravi
AU - Baggiano, Andrea
AU - Beltrama, Virginia
AU - Cerci, Rodrigo
AU - Choi, Eui-Young
AU - Choi, Jung-Hyun
AU - Choi, So-Yeon
AU - Chung, Namsik
AU - Cole, Jason
AU - Doh, Joon-Hyung
AU - Ha, Sang-Jin
AU - Her, Ae-Young
AU - Kepka, Cezary
AU - Kim, Jang-Young
AU - Kim, Jin-Won
AU - Kim, Sang-Wook
AU - Kim, Woong
AU - Pontone, Gianluca
AU - Valeti, Uma
AU - Villines, Todd C.
AU - Lu, Yao
AU - Kumar, Amit
AU - Cho, Iksung
AU - Danad, Ibrahim
AU - Han, Donghee
AU - Heo, Ran
AU - Lee, Sang-Eun
AU - Lee, Ji Hyun
AU - Park, Hyung-Bok
AU - Sung, Ji-min
AU - Leflang, David
AU - Zullo, Joseph
AU - Shaw, Leslee J.
AU - Min, James K.
PY - 2019/7/1
Y1 - 2019/7/1
N2 - 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)
AB - 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)
KW - coronary computed tomographic angiography
KW - invasive coronary angiography
KW - major adverse cardiac events
KW - stable ischemic heart disease
UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85067505210&origin=inward
UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30553687
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.09.018
DO - 10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.09.018
M3 - Article
C2 - 30553687
VL - 12
SP - 1303
EP - 1312
JO - JACC. Cardiovascular imaging
JF - JACC. Cardiovascular imaging
SN - 1876-7591
IS - 7
ER -