Severance Cardiovascular Hospital, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, South Korea.
Dalio Institute of Cardiovascular Imaging, New York-Presbyterian Hospital and Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 Jul;12(7 Pt 2):1303-1312. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.09.018. Epub 2018 Dec 12.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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).
本研究旨在比较采用冠状动脉计算机断层扫描血管造影术(CCTA)进行选择性转诊策略与直接转诊策略(以经皮冠状动脉造影术[ICA]作为索引程序)的安全性和诊断效果。
在出现疑似冠心病(CAD)症状和体征的患者中,相当一部分被转诊至 ICA 的患者并无明显的、阻塞性狭窄。
在一项针对非紧急指征下接受 ICA 检查的患者的多中心、随机临床试验中,比较了选择性转诊策略与直接转诊策略。主要终点是在中位随访 1 年时,复合主要不良心血管事件(盲法判定的死亡、心肌梗死、不稳定型心绞痛、卒中和紧急/即刻冠状动脉血运重建或心脏住院)的非劣效性,乘法边界为 1.33。
在 22 个研究中心,823 例患者被随机分配至选择性转诊组,808 例患者被随机分配至直接转诊组。在 1 年时,选择性转诊策略达到了 1.33 的非劣效性边界(p = 0.026),且试验随机分组的两组之间事件发生率相似(4.6%比 4.6%;风险比:0.99;95%置信区间:0.66 至 1.47)。在进行 CCTA 后,选择性转诊组中仅 23%的患者进一步接受了 ICA 检查,这一比例低于直接转诊至 ICA 组。与直接转诊至 ICA 组相比,选择性转诊组的冠状动脉血运重建发生率较低(13%比 18%;p < 0.001)。选择性转诊组的 ICA 正常率为 24.6%,而直接转诊至 ICA 组的正常率为 61.1%(p < 0.001)。
在疑似 CAD 且适合接受 ICA 检查的稳定型患者中,选择性转诊和直接转诊策略在 1 年时主要不良心血管事件发生率相似,这表明这两种诊断方法同样有效。在选择性转诊策略中,由于较少使用 ICA,诊断效果更好,这支持了 CCTA 作为一种有效、准确的方法来指导 ICA 检查决策的作用。(选择性冠状动脉造影的冠状动脉计算机断层血管造影术[CONSERVE];NCT01810198)