Clinical risk factors and atherosclerotic plaque extent to define risk for major events in patients without obstructive coronary artery disease: the long-term coronary computed tomography angiography CONFIRM registry.

AimsIn patients without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), we examined the prognostic value of risk factors and atherosclerotic extent.Methods and resultsPatients from the long-term CONFIRM registry without prior CAD and without obstructive (≥50%) stenosis were included. Within the groups of normal coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) (N = 1849) and non-obstructive CAD (N = 1698), the prognostic value of traditional clinical risk factors and atherosclerotic extent (segment involvement score, SIS) was assessed with Cox models. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or late revascularization. In total, 3547 patients were included (age 57.9 ± 12.1 years, 57.8% male), experiencing 460 MACE during 5.4 years of follow-up. Age, body mass index, hypertension, and diabetes were the clinical variables associated with increased MACE risk, but the magnitude of risk was higher for CCTA defined atherosclerotic extent; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for SIS >5 was 3.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3-4.9) while HR for diabetes and hypertension were 1.7 (95% CI 1.3-2.2) and 1.4 (95% CI 1.1-1.7), respectively. Exclusion of revascularization as endpoint did not modify the results. In normal CCTA, presence of ≥1 traditional risk factors did not worsen prognosis (log-rank P = 0.248), while it did in non-obstructive CAD (log-rank P = 0.025). Adjusted for SIS, hypertension and diabetes predicted MACE risk in non-obstructive CAD, while diabetes did not increase risk in absence of CAD (P-interaction = 0.004).ConclusionAmong patients without obstructive CAD, the extent of CAD provides more prognostic information for MACE than traditional cardiovascular risk factors. An interaction was observed between risk factors and CAD burden, suggesting synergistic effects of both

Prognostic value of coronary artery calcium score in symptomatic individuals: A meta-analysis of 34,000 subjects

Background: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scanning has evolved into an important subclinical prediction method for cardiovascular diseases in asymptomatic subjects. However, the prognostic implication of CAC scanning in symptomatic individuals is less clear. Objectives: To assess the prognostic utility of CAC in predicting risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in stable patients with suspected CAD. Methods: We did a systematic electronic literature search for studies presenting original data in CAC score, and reporting cardiovascular events in stable, symptomatic patients as primary outcome. Primary outcome of the meta-analysis was the occurrence of MACE, a composite of late coronary revascularization, hospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and cardiac death or all-cause mortality. Using random effects models, we pooled relative risk ratios of CAC for MACE, and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) of the associations between different CAC strata (CAC 0–100,100–400, and ≥ 400, versus CAC = 0) and incident MACE. Results: We included 19 observational studies (n = 34,041). In total, 1601 events were analyzed, of which 158 in patients with CAC = 0. The pooled relative risk ratio was 5.71 (95%-CI: 3.98;8.19) for subjects with CAC > 0. The pooled estimate of adjusted HRs demonstrated increasing, positive associations, with the strongest association for CAC > 400 (HR: 4.88; 95%-CI: 2.44;9.27). Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrated that increased levels of CAC are strongly and independently associated with increased risk for MACE in stable, symptomatic patients with suspected CAD, showing increasing risk with greater CAC scores. Application of CAC scanning as a prediction method could be useful for a considerable number of such patients

Coronary atherosclerosis scoring with semiquantitative CCTA risk scores for prediction of major adverse cardiac events: Propensity score-based analysis of diabetic and non-diabetic patients.

AIMS:We aimed to compare semiquantitative coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) risk scores - which score presence, extent, composition, stenosis and/or location of coronary artery disease (CAD) - and their prognostic value between patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM). Risk scores derived from general chest-pain populations are often challenging to apply in DM patients, because of numerous confounders. METHODS:Out of a combined cohort from the Leiden University Medical Center and the CONFIRM registry with 5-year follow-up data, we performed a secondary analysis in diabetic patients with suspected CAD who were clinically referred for CCTA. A total of 732 DM patients was 1:1 propensity-matched with 732 non-DM patients by age, sex and cardiovascular risk factors. A subset of 7 semiquantitative CCTA risk scores was compared between groups: 1) any stenosis ≥50%, 2) any stenosis ≥70%, 3) stenosis-severity component of the coronary artery disease-reporting and data system (CAD-RADS), 4) segment involvement score (SIS), 5) segment stenosis score (SSS), 6) CT-adapted Leaman score (CT-LeSc), and 7) Leiden CCTA risk score. Cox-regression analysis was performed to assess the association between the scores and the primary endpoint of all-cause death and non-fatal myocardial infarction. Also, area under the receiver-operating characteristics curves were compared to evaluate discriminatory ability. RESULTS:A total of 1,464 DM and non-DM patients (mean age 58 ± 12 years, 40% women) underwent CCTA and 155 (11%) events were documented after median follow-up of 5.1 years. In DM patients, the 7 semiquantitative CCTA risk scores were significantly more prevalent or higher as compared to non-DM patients (p ≤ 0.022). All scores were independently associated with the primary endpoint in both patients with and without DM (p ≤ 0.020), with non-significant interaction between the scores and diabetes (interaction p ≥ 0.109). Discriminatory ability of the Leiden CCTA risk score in DM patients was significantly better than any stenosis ≥50% and ≥70% (p = 0.003 and p = 0.007, respectively), but comparable to the CAD-RADS, SIS, SSS and CT-LeSc that also focus on the extent of CAD (p ≥ 0.265). CONCLUSION:Coronary atherosclerosis scoring with semiquantitative CCTA risk scores incorporating the total extent of CAD discriminate major adverse cardiac events well, and might be useful for risk stratification of patients with DM beyond the binary evaluation of obstructive stenosis alone

Percent atheroma volume: Optimal variable to report whole-heart atherosclerotic plaque burden with coronary CTA, the PARADIGM study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Different methodologies to report whole-heart atherosclerotic plaque on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) have been utilized. We examined which of the three commonly used plaque burden definitions was least affected by differences in body surface area (BSA) and sex. METHODS:The PARADIGM study includes symptomatic patients with suspected coronary atherosclerosis who underwent serial CCTA >2 years apart. Coronary lumen, vessel, and plaque were quantified from the coronary tree on a 0.5 mm cross-sectional basis by a core-lab, and summed to per-patient. Three quantitative methods of plaque burden were employed: (1) total plaque volume (PV) in mm3, (2) percent atheroma volume (PAV) in % [which equaled: PV/vessel volume * 100%], and (3) normalized total atheroma volume (TAVnorm) in mm3 [which equaled: PV/vessel length * mean population vessel length]. Only data from the baseline CCTA were used. PV, PAV, and TAVnorm were compared between patients in the top quartile of BSA vs the remaining, and between sexes. Associations between vessel volume, BSA, and the three plaque burden methodologies were assessed. RESULTS:The study population comprised 1479 patients (age 60.7 ± 9.3 years, 58.4% male) who underwent CCTA. A total of 17,649 coronary artery segments were evaluated with a median of 12 (IQR 11-13) segments per-patient (from a 16-segment coronary tree). Patients with a large BSA (top quartile), compared with the remaining patients, had a larger PV and TAVnorm, but similar PAV. The relation between larger BSA and larger absolute plaque volume (PV and TAVnorm) was mediated by the coronary vessel volume. Independent from the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk (ASCVD) score, vessel volume correlated with PV (P < 0.001), and TAVnorm (P = 0.003), but not with PAV (P = 0.201). The three plaque burden methods were equally affected by sex. CONCLUSIONS:PAV was less affected by patient's body surface area then PV and TAVnorm and may be the preferred method to report coronary atherosclerotic burden

All-cause mortality benefit of coronary revascularization vs. medical therapy in patients without known coronary artery disease undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography: results from CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter Registry)

Aims To date, the therapeutic benefit of revascularization vs. medical therapy for stable individuals undergoing invasive coronary angiography (ICA) based upon coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) findings has not been examined. Methods and results We examined 15 223 patients without known coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing CCTA from eight sites and six countries who were followed for median 2.1 years (interquartile range 1.4-3.3 years) for an endpoint of all-cause mortality. Obstructive CAD by CCTA was defined as a ≥50% luminal diameter stenosis in a major coronary artery. Patients were categorized as having high-risk CAD vs. non-high-risk CAD, with the former including patients with at least obstructive two-vessel CAD with proximal left anterior descending artery involvement, three-vessel CAD, and left main CAD. Death occurred in 185 (1.2%) patients. Patients were categorized into two treatment groups: revascularization (n = 1103; 2.2% mortality) and medical therapy (n = 14 120, 1.1% mortality). To account for non-randomized referral to revascularization, we created a propensity score developed by logistic regression to identify variables that influenced the decision to refer to revascularization. Within this model (C index 0.92, χ2 = 1248, P < 0.0001), obstructive CAD was the most influential factor for referral, followed by an interaction of obstructive CAD with pre-test likelihood of CAD (P = 0.0344). Within CCTA CAD groups, rates of revascularization increased from 3.8% for non-high-risk CAD to 51.2% high-risk CAD. In multivariable models, when compared with medical therapy, revascularization was associated with a survival advantage for patients with high-risk CAD [hazards ratio (HR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.83], with no difference in survival for patients with non-high-risk CAD (HR 3.24, 95% CI 0.76-13.89) (P-value for interaction = 0.03). Conclusion In an intermediate-term follow-up, coronary revascularization is associated with a survival benefit in patients with high-risk CAD by CCTA, with no apparent benefit of revascularization in patients with lesser forms of CA

Is metabolic syndrome predictive of prevalence, extent, and risk of coronary artery disease beyond its components? results from the multinational coronary ct angiography evaluation for clinical outcome: An international multicenter registry (confirm)

Although metabolic syndrome is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and events, its added prognostic value beyond its components remains unknown. This study compared the prevalence, severity of coronary artery disease (CAD), and prognosis of patients with metabolic syndrome to those with individual metabolic syndrome components. The study cohort consisted of 27125 consecutive individuals who underwent ≥64-detector row coronary CT angiography (CCTA) at 12 centers from 2003 to 2009. Metabolic syndrome was defined as per NCEP/ATP III criteria. Metabolic syndrome patients (n=690) were matched 1:1:1 to those with 1 component (n=690) and 2 components (n=690) of metabolic syndrome for age, sex, smoking status, and family history of premature CAD using propensity scoring. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined by a composite of myocardial infarction (MI), acute coronary syndrome, mortality and late target vessel revascularization. Patients with 1 component of metabolic syndrome manifested lower rates of obstructive 1-, 2-, and 3-vessel/left main disease compared to metabolic syndrome patients (9.4% vs 13.8%, 2.6% vs 4.5%, and 1.0% vs 2.3%, respectively; p0.05). At 2.5 years, metabolic syndrome patients experienced a higher rate of MACE compared to patients with 1 component (4.4% vs 1.6%; p=0.002), while no difference observed compared to individuals with 2 components (4.4% vs 3.2% p=0.25) of metabolic syndrome. In conclusion, Metabolic syndrome patients have significantly greater prevalence, severity, and prognosis of CAD compared to patients with 1 but not 2 components of metabolic syndrome

Incremental prognostic utility of coronary CT angiography for asymptomatic patients based upon extent and severity of coronary artery calcium: results from the COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes InteRnational Multicenter (CONFIRM) Study

Aim Prior evidence observed no predictive utility of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) over the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) and the Framingham risk score (FRS), among asymptomatic individuals. Whether the prognostic value of CCTA differs for asymptomatic patients, when stratified by CACS severity, remains unknown. Methods and results From a 12-centre, 6-country observational registry, 3217 asymptomatic individuals without known coronary artery disease (CAD) underwent CACS and CCTA. Individuals were categorized by CACS as: 0-10, 11-100, 101-400, 401-1000, >1000. For CCTA analysis, the number of obstructive vessels—as defined by the per-patient presence of a ≥50% luminal stenosis—was used to grade the extent and severity of CAD. The incremental prognostic value of CCTA over and above FRS was measured by the likelihood ratio (LR) χ2, C-statistic, and continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI) for prediction, discrimination, and reclassification of all-cause mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction. During a median follow-up of 24 months (25th-75th percentile, 17-30 months), there were 58 composite end-points. The incremental value of CCTA over FRS was demonstrated in individuals with CACS >100 (LRχ2, 25.34; increment in C-statistic, 0.24; NRI, 0.62, all P 0.05). For subgroups with CACS >100, the utility of CCTA for predicting the study end-point was evident among individuals whose CACS ranged from 101 to 400; the observed predictive benefit attenuated with increasing CACS. Conclusion Coronary CT angiography provides incremental prognostic utility for prediction of mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction for asymptomatic individuals with moderately high CACS, but not for lower or higher CAC

Rationale and design of the CONFIRM2 (Quantitative COroNary CT Angiography Evaluation For Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational, Multicenter Registry) study.

BACKGROUND In the last 15 years, large registries and several randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the diagnostic and prognostic value of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Advances in CT scanner technology and developments of analytic tools now enable accurate quantification of coronary artery disease (CAD), including total coronary plaque volume (TPV) and low attenuation plaque volume (LAP). The primary aim of CONFIRM2, (Quantitative COroNary CT Angiography Evaluation For Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational, Multicenter Registry) is to perform comprehensive quantification of CCTA findings, including coronary, non-coronary cardiac, non-cardiac vascular, non-cardiac findings, and relate them to clinical variables and cardiovascular clinical outcomes. DESIGN CONFIRM2 is a multicenter, international observational cohort study designed to evaluate multidimensional associations between quantitative phenotype of cardiovascular disease and future adverse clinical outcomes in subjects undergoing clinically indicated CCTA. The targeted population is heterogenous and includes patients undergoing CCTA for atherosclerotic evaluation, valvular heart disease, congenital heart disease or pre-procedural evaluation. Automated software will be utilized for quantification of coronary plaque, stenosis, vascular morphology and cardiac structures for rapid and reproducible tissue characterization. Up to 30,000 patients will be included from up to 50 international multi-continental clinical CCTA sites and followed for 3-4 years. SUMMARY CONFIRM2 is one of the largest CCTA studies to establish the clinical value of a multiparametric approach to quantify the phenotype of cardiovascular disease by CCTA using automated imaging solutions

Coronary dominance and prognosis in patients undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography: results from the CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter) registry

Aims Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) has become an important tool for non-invasive diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). Coronary dominance can be assessed by CCTA; however, the predictive value of coronary dominance is controversially discussed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and prognosis of coronary dominance in a large prospective, international multicentre cohort of patients undergoing CCTA. Methods and results The study population consisted of 6382 patients with or without CAD (47% females, 53% males, mean age 56.9 ± 12.3 years) who underwent CCTA and were followed over a period of 60 months. Right or left coronary dominance was determined. Right dominance was present in 91% (n = 5817) and left in 9% (n = 565) of the study population. At the end of follow-up, outcome in patients with obstructive CAD (>50% luminal stenosis) and right dominance was similar compared with patients with left dominance [hazard ratio (HR) 0.46, 95% CI 0.16-1.32, P = 0.15]. Furthermore, no differences were observed for the type of coronary dominance in patients with non-obstructive CAD (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.41-2.21, P = 0.8962) or normal coronary arteries (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.68-1.59, P = 0.9). Subgroup analysis in patients with left main disease revealed an elevated hazard of the combined endpoint for left dominance (HR 6.45, 95% CI 1.66-25.0, P = 0.007), but not for right dominance. Conclusion In our study population, survival after 5 years of follow-up did not differ significantly between patients with left or right coronary dominance. Thus, assessment of coronary vessel dominance by CCTA may not enhance risk stratification in patients with normal coronary arteries or obstructive CAD, but may add prognostic information for specific subpopulation

Coronary dominance and prognosis in patients undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography: Results from the CONFIRM (COronary CTAngiography EvaluatioN for Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter) registry

Aims: Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) has become an important tool for non-invasive diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). Coronary dominance can be assessed by CCTA; however, the predictive value of coronary dominance is controversially discussed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and prognosis of coronary dominance in a large prospective, international multicentre cohort of patients undergoing CCTA. Methods and results: The study population consisted of 6382 patients with or without CAD (47% females, 53% males, mean age 56.9±12.3 years) who underwent CCTA and were followed over a period of 60 months. Right or left coronary dominance was determined. Right dominance was present in 91% (n = 5817) and left in 9% (n = 565) of the study population. At the end of follow-up, outcome in patients with obstructive CAD (>50% luminal stenosis) and right dominance was similar compared with patients with left dominance [hazard ratio (HR) 0.46, 95% CI 0.16-1.32, P = 0.15]. Furthermore, no differences were observed for the type of coronary dominance in patients with non-obstructive CAD(HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.41-2.21, P = 0.8962) or normal coronary arteries (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.68-1.59, P = 0.9). Subgroup analysis in patients with left main disease revealed an elevated hazard of the combined endpoint for left dominance (HR 6.45, 95% CI 1.66-25.0, P = 0.007), but not for right dominance. Conclusion: In our study population, survival after 5 years of follow-up did not differ significantly between patientswith left or right coronary dominance. Thus, assessment of coronary vessel dominance by CCTA may not enhance risk stratification in patients with normal coronary arteries or obstructive CAD, but may add prognostic information for specific subpopulations