Sharples L, Hughes V, Crean A, Dyer M, Buxton M, Goldsmith K, Stone D
MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2007 Dec;11(49):iii-iv, ix-115. doi: 10.3310/hta11490.
To assess the acceptability and feasibility of functional tests as a gateway to angiography for management of coronary artery disease (CAD), the ability of diagnostic strategies to identify patients who should undergo revascularisation, patient outcomes in each diagnostic strategy, and the most cost-effective diagnostic strategy for patients with suspected or known CAD.
A rapid systematic review of economic evaluations of alternative diagnostic strategies for CAD was carried out. A pragmatic and generalisable randomised controlled trial was undertaken to assess the use of the functional cardiac tests: angiography (controls); single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT); magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); stress echocardiography.
The setting was Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, a tertiary cardiothoracic referral centre.
Patients with suspected or known CAD and an exercise test result that required non-urgent angiography.
Patients were randomised to one of the four initial diagnostic tests.
Eighteen months post-randomisation: exercise time (modified Bruce protocol); cost-effectiveness compared with angiography (diagnosis, treatment and follow-up costs). The aim was to demonstrate equivalence in exercise time between those randomised to functional tests and those randomised to angiography [defined as the confidence interval (CI) for mean difference from angiography within 1 minute].
The 898 patients were randomised to angiography (n = 222), SPECT (n = 224), MRI (n = 226) or stress echo (n = 226). Initial diagnostic tests were completed successfully with unequivocal results for 98% of angiography, 94% of SPECT (p = 0.05), 78% of MRI (p < 0.001) and 90% of stress echocardiography patients (p < 0.001). Some 22% of SPECT patients, 20% of MRI patients and 25% of stress echo patients were not subsequently referred for an angiogram. Positive functional tests were confirmed by positive angiography in 83% of SPECT patients, 89% of MRI patients and 84% of stress echo patients. Negative functional tests were followed by positive angiograms in 31% of SPECT patients, 52% of MRI patients and 48% of stress echo patients tested. The proportions that had coronary artery bypass graft surgery were 10% (angiography), 11% (MRI) and 13% (SPECT and stress echo) and percutaneous coronary intervention 25% (angiography), 18% (SPECT) and 23% (MRI and stress echo). At 18 months, comparing SPECT and stress echo with angiography, a clinically significant difference in total exercise time can be ruled out. The MRI group had significantly shorter mean total exercise time of 35 seconds and the upper limit of the CI was 1.14 minutes less than in the angiography group, so a difference of at least 1 minute cannot be ruled out. At 6 months post-treatment, SPECT and angiography had equivalent mean exercise time. Compared with angiography, the MRI and stress echo groups had significantly shorter mean total exercise time of 37 and 38 seconds, respectively, and the upper limit of both CIs was 1.16 minutes, so a difference of at least 1 minute cannot be ruled out. The differences were mainly attributable to revascularised patients. There were significantly more non-fatal adverse events in the stress echo group, mostly admissions for chest pain, but no significant difference in the number of patients reporting events. Mean (95% CI) total additional costs over 18 months, compared with angiography, were 415 pounds (-310 pounds to 1084 pounds) for SPECT, 426 pounds (-247 pounds to 1088 pounds) for MRI and 821 pounds (10 pounds to 1715 pounds) for stress echocardiography, with very little difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) amongst the groups (less than 0.04 QALYs over 18 months). Cost-effectiveness was mainly influenced by test costs, clinicians' willingness to trust negative functional tests and by a small number of patients who had a particularly difficult clinical course.
Between 20 and 25% of patients can avoid invasive testing using functional testing as a gateway to angiography, without substantial effects on outcomes. The SPECT strategy was as useful as angiography in identifying patients who should undergo revascularisation and the additional cost was not significant, in fact it would be reduced further by restricting the rest test to patients who have a positive stress test. MRI had the largest number of test failures and, in this study, had the least practical use in screening patients with suspected CAD, although it had similar outcomes to stress echo and is still an evolving technology. Stress echo patients had a 10% test failure rate, significantly shorter total exercise time and time to angina at 6 months post-treatment, and a greater number of adverse events, leading to significantly higher costs. Given the level of skill required for stress echo, it may be best to reserve this test for those who have a contraindication to SPECT and are unable or unwilling to have MRI. Further research, using blinded reassessment of functional test results and angiograms, is required to formally assess diagnostic accuracy. Longer-term cost-effectiveness analysis, and further studies of MRI and new generation computed tomography are also required.
评估功能测试作为冠状动脉疾病(CAD)血管造影检查前置手段的可接受性和可行性、诊断策略识别应接受血运重建患者的能力、各诊断策略下患者的预后,以及疑似或已知CAD患者最具成本效益的诊断策略。
对CAD替代诊断策略的经济评估进行快速系统评价。开展一项实用且具有广泛适用性的随机对照试验,以评估心脏功能测试的应用:血管造影(对照组);单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT);磁共振成像(MRI);负荷超声心动图。
研究地点为帕普沃思医院国民保健服务信托基金,一家三级心胸转诊中心。
疑似或已知CAD且运动试验结果需要非紧急血管造影检查的患者。
患者被随机分配至四种初始诊断测试之一。
随机分组18个月后:运动时间(改良布鲁斯方案);与血管造影检查相比的成本效益(诊断、治疗和随访成本)。目标是证明随机分配至功能测试组和血管造影检查组的患者在运动时间上具有等效性[定义为与血管造影检查相比平均差异的置信区间(CI)在1分钟内]。
898例患者被随机分配至血管造影检查组(n = 222)、SPECT组(n = 224)、MRI组(n = 226)或负荷超声心动图组(n = 226)。初始诊断测试成功完成,血管造影检查组98%、SPECT组94%(p = 0.05)、MRI组78%(p < 0.001)和负荷超声心动图组90%(p < 0.001)的患者获得明确结果。约22%的SPECT患者、20%的MRI患者和25%的负荷超声心动图患者随后未被转诊进行血管造影检查。83%的SPECT患者、89%的MRI患者和84%的负荷超声心动图患者功能测试阳性结果经血管造影检查证实。功能测试阴性的患者中,31%的SPECT患者、52%的MRI患者和48%接受测试的负荷超声心动图患者随后血管造影检查结果为阳性。接受冠状动脉旁路移植手术的比例分别为10%(血管造影检查组)、11%(MRI组)和13%(SPECT组和负荷超声心动图组),接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的比例分别为25%(血管造影检查组)、18%(SPECT组)和23%(MRI组和负荷超声心动图组)。在18个月时,将SPECT组和负荷超声心动图组与血管造影检查组进行比较,可以排除总运动时间存在临床显著差异。MRI组的平均总运动时间显著缩短35秒,CI上限比血管造影检查组少1.14分钟,因此不能排除至少1分钟的差异。治疗后6个月,SPECT组和血管造影检查组的平均运动时间相当。与血管造影检查组相比,MRI组和负荷超声心动图组的平均总运动时间分别显著缩短37秒和38秒,两组CI上限均为1.16分钟,因此不能排除至少1分钟的差异。差异主要归因于接受血运重建的患者。负荷超声心动图组的非致命不良事件明显更多,主要是因胸痛入院,但报告事件的患者数量无显著差异。与血管造影检查相比,18个月期间SPECT组平均(95%CI)总额外成本为415英镑(-310英镑至1084英镑),MRI组为426英镑(-247英镑至1088英镑),负荷超声心动图组为821英镑(10英镑至1715英镑),各组间质量调整生命年(QALYs)差异很小(18个月内小于0.04 QALYs)。成本效益主要受测试成本、临床医生对功能测试阴性结果的信任程度以及少数临床病程特别复杂的患者影响。
20%至25%的患者可通过将功能测试作为血管造影检查的前置手段避免侵入性检查,且对预后无实质性影响。SPECT策略在识别应接受血运重建的患者方面与血管造影检查同样有效,额外成本不显著,实际上通过将静息试验限制在运动试验阳性的患者中,成本还会进一步降低。MRI的测试失败率最高,在本研究中,对疑似CAD患者进行筛查时实用性最低,尽管其预后与负荷超声心动图相似,且仍是一项不断发展的技术。负荷超声心动图组患者的测试失败率为10%,治疗后6个月的总运动时间和心绞痛发作时间显著缩短,不良事件更多,导致成本显著更高。鉴于负荷超声心动图所需的技术水平,最好将此测试保留给那些对SPECT有禁忌证且无法或不愿进行MRI检查的患者。需要通过对功能测试结果和血管造影检查进行盲法重新评估的进一步研究来正式评估诊断准确性。还需要进行长期成本效益分析,以及对MRI和新一代计算机断层扫描的进一步研究。