A clinical prediction rule for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: validation, updating, and extension

Aims The aim was to validate, update, and extend the Diamond-Forrester model for estimating the probability of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in a contemporary cohort. Methods and results Prospectively collected data from 14 hospitals on patients with chest pain without a history of CAD and referred for conventional coronary angiography (CCA) were used. Primary outcome was obstructive CAD, defined as ≥50% stenosis in one or more vessels on CCA. The validity of the Diamond-Forrester model was assessed using calibration plots, calibration-in-the-large, and recalibration in logistic regression. The model was subsequently updated and extended by revising the predictive value of age, sex, and type of chest pain. Diagnostic performance was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (c-statistic) and reclassification was determined. We included 2260 patients, of whom 1319 had obstructive CAD on CCA. Validation demonstrated an overestimation of the CAD probability, especially in women. The updated and extended models demonstrated a c-statistic of 0.79 (95% CI 0.77-0.81) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.80-0.84), respectively. Sixteen per cent of men and 64% of women were correctly reclassified. The predicted probability of obstructive CAD ranged from 10% for 50-year-old females with non-specific chest pain to 91% for 80-year-old males with typical chest pain. Predictions varied across hospitals due to differences in disease prevalence. Conclusion Our results suggest that the Diamond-Forrester model overestimates the probability of CAD especially in women. We updated the predictive effects of age, sex, type of chest pain, and hospital setting which improved model performance and we extended it to include patients of 70 years and olde

Cardiac imaging in ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack of undetermined cause: Systematic review & meta-analysis

Background: Patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) of undetermined cause often undergo cardiac imaging in search of a cardioembolic source. As the choice of the most appropriate imaging approach is controversial and therapeutic implications have changed over time, we aimed to identify in patients with “cryptogenic stroke or TIA” the yield of transthoracic or transesophageal echocardiography (TTE or TEE) and cardiac computed tomography (CT). Methods and results: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the PRISMA guidelines. Included were studies that assessed consecutive patients with ischemic stroke or TIA of undetermined cause to evaluate the yield of TTE, TEE, or cardiac CT for detecting cardioembolic sources. For each type of cardioembolic source the pooled prevalence was calculated. Only six out of 1458 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria (1022 patients). One study reported the yield of TTE, four of TEE, and one of both TTE and TEE; no study assessed cardiac CT. Mean patient age ranged from 44.3–71.2 years, 49.2–59.7% were male. TTE detected 43 cardioembolic sources in 316 patients (4 (1.3%) major, 39 (12.3%) minor), and TEE 248 in 937 patients (55 (5.9%) major, 193 (20.6%) minor). The most prevalent major cardioembolic source was left atrial appendage thrombus, yet results were heterogeneous among studies. Conclusions: TTE and TEE infrequently detect major cardioembolic sources that require a change of therapy. Findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies. A large-sized prospective clinical trial is warranted to support evidence-based decision-making

Detection of major cardioembolic sources in real-world patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack of undetermined cause

Background/Aim: Current guidelines recommend transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and ambulatory rhythm monitoring following ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) of undetermined cause for identifying cardioembolic sources (CES). Due to ongoing controversies about this routine strategy, we evaluated its yield in a real-world setting. Methods: In a tertiary medical center, we retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients with ischemic stroke or TIA of undetermined cause, who (after standard work-up) underwent TTE, ambulatory rhythm monitoring, or both. CES were classified as major if probably related to ischemic events and warranting a change of therapy. Results: Between January 2014 and December 2017, 674 patients had ischemic stroke or TIA of undetermined cause. Of all 484 patients (71.8%) who underwent TTE, 9 (1.9%) had a major CES. However, 7 of them had already been identified for cardiac evaluation due to new major electrocardiographic abnormalities or cardiac symptoms. Thus, only 2 patients (0.4%) truly benefitted from unselected TTE screening. Ambulatory rhythm monitoring was performed in 411 patients (61.0%) and revealed AF in 10 patients (2.4%). Conclusion: Detecting a major CES is essential because appropriate treatment lowers the risk of recurrent stroke. Nonetheless, in this real-world study that aimed at routine use of TTE and ambulatory rhythm monitoring in patients with ischemic stroke or TIA of undetermined cause, the prevalence of major CES was low. Most patients with major CES on TTE already had an indication for referral to a cardiologist, suggesting that major CES might also have been identified with a much more selective use of TTE

A clinical prediction rule for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: validation, updating, and extension

Aims The aim was to validate, update, and extend the Diamond-Forrester model for estimating the probability of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in a contemporary cohort. Methods and results Prospectively collected data from 14 hospitals on patients with chest pain without a history of CAD and referred for conventional coronary angiography (CCA) were used. Primary outcome was obstructive CAD, defined as ≥50% stenosis in one or more vessels on CCA. The validity of the Diamond-Forrester model was assessed using calibration plots, calibration-in-the-large, and recalibration in logistic regression. The model was subsequently updated and extended by revising the predictive value of age, sex, and type of chest pain. Diagnostic performance was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (c-statistic) and reclassification was determined. We included 2260 patients, of whom 1319 had obstructive CAD on CCA. Validation demonstrated an overestimation of the CAD probability, especially in women. The updated and extended models demonstrated a c-statistic of 0.79 (95% CI 0.77-0.81) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.80-0.84), respectively. Sixteen per cent of men and 64% of women were correctly reclassified. The predicted probability of obstructive CAD ranged from 10% for 50-year-old females with non-specific chest pain to 91% for 80-year-old males with typical chest pain. Predictions varied across hospitals due to differences in disease prevalence. Conclusion Our results suggest that the Diamond-Forrester model overestimates the probability of CAD especially in women. We updated the predictive effects of age, sex, type of chest pain, and hospital setting which improved model performance and we extended it to include patients of 70 years and olde