Coronary computed tomography angiography versus guideline-recommended clinical risk assessment for statin allocation in outpatients with suspected coronary artery disease.

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to compare coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and guideline-recommended clinical risk assessment for the value in statin allocation in outpatients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

For the 7860 eligible outpatients with suspected CAD who underwent CCTA, we evaluate hard atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) stratified by guideline-recommended clinical risk assessment, and CCTA. For intermediate risk patients, we also compared the predictive value of CCTA and CAC.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up period of 3.6 years, a total of 83 (1.1 %) hard ASCVD and 170 (2.2 %) MACCE occurred. The event rate increased with both the intensity of statin recommendation (e.g., hard ASCVD: 1.5 per 1000 person-years [PY] for statin not recommended, 4.1 per 1000 PY for moderate-intensity statin, and 8.9 per 1000 PY for high-intensity statin) and the severity of coronary stenosis (e.g., hard ASCVD: 0.7 per 1000 PY for no plaque, 5.1 per 1000 PY for non-obstructive CAD, and 11.2 per 1000 PY for obstructive CAD). When stratified by CCTA, higher intensity statin recommendation was not a statistically significant independent risk factor, both for hard ASCVD and MACCE. For the predictive value of hard ASCVD in intermediate risk patients, there was no statistically significant difference between CCTA and CAC (the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.692 versus 0.702; = 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

CCTA played a more important role in statin allocation compared to guideline-recommended clinical risk assessment in outpatients who underwent CCTA.