TY - JOUR
T1 - All-cause mortality benefit of coronary revascularization vs. medical therapy in patients without known coronary artery disease undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography
T2 - Results from CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN for Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter Registry)
AU - Min, James K.
AU - Berman, Daniel S.
AU - Dunning, Allison
AU - Achenbach, Stephan
AU - Al-Mallah, Mouaz
AU - Budoff, Matthew J.
AU - Cademartiri, Filippo
AU - Callister, Tracy Q.
AU - Chang, Hyuk Jae
AU - Cheng, Victor
AU - Chinnaiyan, Kavitha
AU - Chow, Benjamin J.W.
AU - Cury, Ricardo
AU - Delago, Augustin
AU - Feuchtner, Gudrun
AU - Hadamitzky, Martin
AU - Hausleiter, Joerg
AU - Kaufmann, Philipp
AU - Karlsberg, Ronald P.
AU - Kim, Yong Jin
AU - Leipsic, Jonathon
AU - Lin, Fay Y.
AU - Maffei, Erica
AU - Plank, Fabian
AU - Raff, Gilbert
AU - Villines, Todd
AU - Labounty, Troy M.
AU - Shaw, Leslee J.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2013 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2012/12
Y1 - 2012/12
N2 - 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 resultsWe 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).ConclusionIn 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 CAD.
AB - 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 resultsWe 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).ConclusionIn 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 CAD.
KW - Computed tomography
KW - Coronary artery disease
KW - Coronary revascularization
KW - Medical therapy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871201509&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84871201509&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs315
DO - 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs315
M3 - Article
C2 - 23048194
AN - SCOPUS:84871201509
SN - 0195-668X
VL - 33
SP - 3088
EP - 3097
JO - European heart journal
JF - European heart journal
IS - 24
ER -