5 research outputs found

    Health-related qualify of life, angina type and coronary artery disease in patients with stable chest pain

    Get PDF
    Background: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is impaired in patients with stable angina but patients often present with other forms of chest pain. The aim of this study was to compare the pre-diagnostic HRQoL in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) according to angina type, gender, and presence of obstructive CAD. Methods: From the pilot study for the European DISCHARGE trial, we analysed data from 24 sites including 1263 patients (45.9% women, 61.1 ± 11.3 years) who were clinically referred for invasive coronary angiography (ICA; 617 patients) or coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA; 646 patients). Prior to the procedures, patients completed HRQoL questionnaires: the Short Form (SF)-12v2, the EuroQoL (EQ-5D-3 L) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Results: Fifty-five percent of ICA and 35% of CTA patients had typical angina, 23 and 33% had atypical angina, 18 and 28% had non-anginal chest discomfort and 5 and 5% had other chest discomfort, respectively. Patients with typical angina had the poorest physical functioning compared to the other angina groups (SF-12 physical component score; 41.2 ± 8.8, 43.3 ± 9.1, 46.2 ± 9.0, 46.4 ± 11.4, respectively, all age and gender-adjusted p < 0.01), and highest anxiety levels (8.3 ± 4.1, 7.5 ± 4.1, 6.5 ± 4.0, 4.7 ± 4.5, respectively, all adjusted p < 0.01). On all other measures, patients with typical or atypical angina had lower HRQoL compared to the two other groups (all adjusted p < 0.05). HRQoL did not differ between patients with and without obstructive CAD while women had worse HRQoL compared with men, irrespective of age and angina type. Conclusions: Prior to a diagnostic procedure for stable chest pain, HRQoL is associated with chest pain characteristics, but not with obstructive CAD, and is significantly lower in women. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02400229

    Pilot study of the multicentre DISCHARGE Trial: image quality and protocol adherence results of computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography

    No full text
    Objective To implement detailed EU cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) quality criteria in the multicentre DISCHARGE trial (FP72007-2013, EC-GA 603266), we reviewed image quality and adherence to CCTA protocol and to the recommendations of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in a pilot study. Materials and methods From every clinical centre, imaging datasets of three patients per arm were assessed for adherence to the inclusion/exclusion criteria of the pilot study, predefined standards for the CCTA protocol and ICA recommendations, image quality and non-diagnostic (NDX) rate. These parameters were compared via multinomial regression and ANOVA. If a site did not reach the minimum quality level, additional datasets had to be sent before entering into the final accepted database (FADB). Results We analysed 226 cases (150 CCTA/76 ICA). The inclusion/exclusion criteria were not met by 6 of the 226 (2.7%) datasets. The predefined standard was not met by 13 of 76 ICA datasets (17.1%). This percentage decreased between the initial CCTA database and the FADB (multinomial regression, 53 of 70 vs 17 of 75 [76%] vs [23%]). The signal-to-noise ratio and contrast-to-noise ratio of the FADB did not improve significantly (ANOVA, p = 0.20; p = 0.09). The CTA NDX rate was reduced, but not significantly (initial CCTA database 15 of 70 [21.4%]) and FADB 9 of 75 [12%]; p = 0.13). Conclusion We were able to increase conformity to the inclusion/exclusion criteria and CCTA protocol, improve image quality and decrease the CCTA NDX rate by implementing EU CCTA quality criteria and ICA recommendations.Cardiovascular Aspects of Radiolog

    Correction to: Pilot study of the multicentre DISCHARGE trial: image quality and protocol adherence results of computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography

    No full text
    The original version of this article, published on 16 December 2019, unfortunately contained two mistakes. Firstly, the name of Jonathan Dermot Dodd was presented incorrectly. Secondly, the information about the equal contribution of Gianluca De Rubeis and Adriane E. Napp, and Marc Dewey and Marco Francone is missing. The corrected author list is given above and the missing article note below. Furthermore, affiliation 48 from the original version of the article was a duplicate and is therefore removed
    corecore