Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging · 2010
Prognostic value of coronary computed tomographic angiography in comparison with calcium scoring and clinical risk scores.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hadamitzky Martin, Distler Roland, Meyer Tanja, Hein Franziska, Kastrati Adnan, Martinoff Stefan, Schömig Albert, Hausleiter Jörg
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Several studies have demonstrated a high accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for detection of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), whereas some studies have also shown a good prediction of cardiac events. However, it remains to be proven whether CCTA is better predictive of events than conventional risk scores or calcium scoring. Therefore, we compared CCTA with calcium scoring and clinical risk scores for the ability to predict cardiac events.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=2223) with suspected CAD undergoing CCTA were followed up for a median of 28 months. The end point was the occurrence of cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring hospitalization, and coronary revascularization later than 90 days after CCTA). Patients with obstructive CAD had a significantly higher event rate (2.9% per year; 95% confidence interval, 2.1 to 4.0) than those without obstructive CAD, having an event rate 0.3% per year (95% confidence interval, 0.1 to 0.5; hazard ratio, 13.5; 95% confidence interval, 6.7 to 27.2; P<0.001). CCTA had significant incremental predictive value when compared with calcium scoring, both with scores assessing the degree of stenosis (P<0.001) and with scores assessing the number of diseased coronary segments (P=0.027).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with suspected CAD, CCTA not only detects coronary stenosis but also improves prediction of cardiac events over and above conventional risk scores and calcium scoring. This may result in a reclassification of cardiovascular risk in a substantial proportion of patients.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=2223) with suspected CAD undergoing CCTA were followed up for a median of 28 months. The end point was the occurrence of cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring hospitalization, and coronary revascularization later than 90 days after CCTA). Patients with obstructive CAD had a significantly higher event rate (2.9% per year; 95% confidence interval, 2.1 to 4.0) than those without obstructive CAD, having an event rate 0.3% per year (95% confidence interval, 0.1 to 0.5; hazard ratio, 13.5; 95% confidence interval, 6.7 to 27.2; P<0.001). CCTA had significant incremental predictive value when compared with calcium scoring, both with scores assessing the degree of stenosis (P<0.001) and with scores assessing the number of diseased coronary segments (P=0.027).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with suspected CAD, CCTA not only detects coronary stenosis but also improves prediction of cardiac events over and above conventional risk scores and calcium scoring. This may result in a reclassification of cardiovascular risk in a substantial proportion of patients.