Comparative effectiveness of initial computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography in women and men with stable chest pain and suspected coronary artery disease:Multicentre randomised trial

Objective: To assess the comparative effectiveness of computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography in women and men with stable chest pain suspected to be caused by coronary artery disease. Design: Prospective, multicentre, randomised pragmatic trial. Setting: Hospitals at 26 sites in 16 European countries. Participants: 2002 (56.2%) women and 1559 (43.8%) men (total of 3561 patients) with suspected coronary artery disease referred for invasive coronary angiography on the basis of stable chest pain and a pre-test probability of obstructive coronary artery disease of 10-60%. Intervention: Both women and men were randomised 1:1 (with stratification by gender and centre) to a strategy of either computed tomography or invasive coronary angiography as the initial diagnostic test (1019 and 983 women, and 789 and 770 men, respectively), and an intention-to-treat analysis was performed. Randomised allocation could not be blinded, but outcomes were assessed by investigators blinded to randomisation group. Main outcome measures: The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke). Key secondary endpoints were an expanded MACE composite (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, transient ischaemic attack, or major procedure related complication) and major procedure related complications. Results: Follow-up at a median of 3.5 years was available in 98.9% (1979/2002) of women and in 99.0% (1544/1559) of men. No statistically significant gender interaction was found for MACE (P=0.29), the expanded MACE composite (P=0.45), or major procedure related complications (P=0.11). In both genders, the rate of MACE did not differ between the computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography groups. In men, the expanded MACE composite endpoint occurred less frequently in the computed tomography group than in the invasive coronary angiography group (22 (2.8%) v 41 (5.3%); hazard ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.87). In women, the risk of having a major procedure related complication was lower in the computed tomography group than in the invasive coronary angiography group (3 (0.3%) v 21 (2.1%); hazard ratio 0.14, 0.04 to 0.46). Conclusion: This study found no evidence for a difference between women and men in the benefit of using computed tomography rather than invasive coronary angiography as the initial diagnostic test for the management of stable chest pain in patients with an intermediate pre-test probability of coronary artery disease. An initial computed tomography scan was associated with fewer major procedure related complications in women and a lower frequency of the expanded MACE composite in men. Trial registration: NCT02400229ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02400229.</p

CT or invasive coronary angiography in stable chest pain

Background: In the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), computed tomography (CT) is an accurate, noninvasive alternative to invasive coronary angiography (ICA). However, the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA in the management of CAD to reduce the frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events is uncertain. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, randomized trial comparing CT with ICA as initial diagnostic imaging strategies for guiding the treatment of patients with stable chest pain who had an intermediate pretest probability of obstructive CAD and were referred for ICA at one of 26 European centers. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) over 3.5 years. Key secondary outcomes were procedure-related complications and angina pectoris. Results: Among 3561 patients (56.2% of whom were women), follow-up was complete for 3523 (98.9%). Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 38 of 1808 patients (2.1%) in the CT group and in 52 of 1753 (3.0%) in the ICA group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 1.07; P=0.10). Major procedure-related complications occurred in 9 patients (0.5%) in the CT group and in 33 (1.9%) in the ICA group (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.55). Angina during the final 4 weeks of follow-up was reported in 8.8% of the patients in the CT group and in 7.5% of those in the ICA group (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.48). Conclusions: Among patients referred for ICA because of stable chest pain and intermediate pretest probability of CAD, the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was similar in the CT group and the ICA group. The frequency of major procedure-related complications was lower with an initial CT strategy. (Funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program and others; DISCHARGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02400229

CT or Invasive Coronary Angiography in Stable Chest Pain.

Background: In the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), computed tomography (CT) is an accurate, noninvasive alternative to invasive coronary angiography (ICA). However, the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA in the management of CAD to reduce the frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events is uncertain. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, randomized trial comparing CT with ICA as initial diagnostic imaging strategies for guiding the treatment of patients with stable chest pain who had an intermediate pretest probability of obstructive CAD and were referred for ICA at one of 26 European centers. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) over 3.5 years. Key secondary outcomes were procedure-related complications and angina pectoris. Results: Among 3561 patients (56.2% of whom were women), follow-up was complete for 3523 (98.9%). Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 38 of 1808 patients (2.1%) in the CT group and in 52 of 1753 (3.0%) in the ICA group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 1.07; P = 0.10). Major procedure-related complications occurred in 9 patients (0.5%) in the CT group and in 33 (1.9%) in the ICA group (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.55). Angina during the final 4 weeks of follow-up was reported in 8.8% of the patients in the CT group and in 7.5% of those in the ICA group (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.48). Conclusions: Among patients referred for ICA because of stable chest pain and intermediate pretest probability of CAD, the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was similar in the CT group and the ICA group. The frequency of major procedure-related complications was lower with an initial CT strategy. (Funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program and others; DISCHARGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02400229.)