Cargando…
Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial
BACKGROUND: Cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) reduces emergency department length of stay compared with standard evaluation in patients with low‐ and intermediate‐risk acute chest pain. Whether diabetic patients have similar benefits is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prespecified...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4943281/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27006119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.003137 |
_version_ | 1782442566493405184 |
---|---|
author | Truong, Quynh A. Schulman‐Marcus, Joshua Zakroysky, Pearl Chou, Eric T. Nagurney, John T. Fleg, Jerome L. Schoenfeld, David A. Udelson, James E. Hoffmann, Udo Woodard, Pamela K. |
author_facet | Truong, Quynh A. Schulman‐Marcus, Joshua Zakroysky, Pearl Chou, Eric T. Nagurney, John T. Fleg, Jerome L. Schoenfeld, David A. Udelson, James E. Hoffmann, Udo Woodard, Pamela K. |
author_sort | Truong, Quynh A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) reduces emergency department length of stay compared with standard evaluation in patients with low‐ and intermediate‐risk acute chest pain. Whether diabetic patients have similar benefits is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prespecified analysis of the Rule Out Myocardial Ischemia/Infarction by Computer Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT II) multicenter trial, we randomized 1000 patients (17% diabetic) with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome to CCTA or standard evaluation. The rate of acute coronary syndrome was 8% in both diabetic and nondiabetic patients (P=1.0). Length of stay was unaffected by the CCTA strategy for diabetic patients (23.9 versus 27.2 hours, P=0.86) but was reduced for nondiabetic patients compared with standard evaluation (8.4 versus 26.5 hours, P<0.0001; P interaction=0.004). CCTA resulted in 3‐fold more direct emergency department discharge in both groups (each P≤0.0001, P interaction=0.27). No difference in hospital admissions was seen between the 2 strategies in diabetic and nondiabetic patients (P interaction=0.09). Both groups had more downstream testing and higher radiation doses with CCTA, but these were highest in diabetic patients (all P interaction≤0.04). Diabetic patients had fewer normal CCTAs than nondiabetic patients (32% versus 50%, P=0.003) and similar normalcy rates with standard evaluation (P=0.70). Notably, 66% of diabetic patients had no or mild stenosis by CCTA with short length of stay comparable to that of nondiabetic patients (P=0.34), whereas those with >50% stenosis had a high prevalence of acute coronary syndrome, invasive coronary angiography, and revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of coronary anatomy with CCTA is beneficial for diabetic patients and can discriminate between lower risk patients with no or little coronary artery disease who can be discharged immediately and higher risk patients with moderate to severe disease who warrant further workup. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01084239. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4943281 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49432812016-07-20 Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial Truong, Quynh A. Schulman‐Marcus, Joshua Zakroysky, Pearl Chou, Eric T. Nagurney, John T. Fleg, Jerome L. Schoenfeld, David A. Udelson, James E. Hoffmann, Udo Woodard, Pamela K. J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) reduces emergency department length of stay compared with standard evaluation in patients with low‐ and intermediate‐risk acute chest pain. Whether diabetic patients have similar benefits is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prespecified analysis of the Rule Out Myocardial Ischemia/Infarction by Computer Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT II) multicenter trial, we randomized 1000 patients (17% diabetic) with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome to CCTA or standard evaluation. The rate of acute coronary syndrome was 8% in both diabetic and nondiabetic patients (P=1.0). Length of stay was unaffected by the CCTA strategy for diabetic patients (23.9 versus 27.2 hours, P=0.86) but was reduced for nondiabetic patients compared with standard evaluation (8.4 versus 26.5 hours, P<0.0001; P interaction=0.004). CCTA resulted in 3‐fold more direct emergency department discharge in both groups (each P≤0.0001, P interaction=0.27). No difference in hospital admissions was seen between the 2 strategies in diabetic and nondiabetic patients (P interaction=0.09). Both groups had more downstream testing and higher radiation doses with CCTA, but these were highest in diabetic patients (all P interaction≤0.04). Diabetic patients had fewer normal CCTAs than nondiabetic patients (32% versus 50%, P=0.003) and similar normalcy rates with standard evaluation (P=0.70). Notably, 66% of diabetic patients had no or mild stenosis by CCTA with short length of stay comparable to that of nondiabetic patients (P=0.34), whereas those with >50% stenosis had a high prevalence of acute coronary syndrome, invasive coronary angiography, and revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of coronary anatomy with CCTA is beneficial for diabetic patients and can discriminate between lower risk patients with no or little coronary artery disease who can be discharged immediately and higher risk patients with moderate to severe disease who warrant further workup. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01084239. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4943281/ /pubmed/27006119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.003137 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Truong, Quynh A. Schulman‐Marcus, Joshua Zakroysky, Pearl Chou, Eric T. Nagurney, John T. Fleg, Jerome L. Schoenfeld, David A. Udelson, James E. Hoffmann, Udo Woodard, Pamela K. Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial |
title | Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial |
title_full | Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial |
title_fullStr | Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial |
title_short | Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial |
title_sort | coronary ct angiography versus standard emergency department evaluation for acute chest pain and diabetic patients: is there benefit with early coronary ct angiography?: results of the randomized comparative effectiveness romicat ii trial |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4943281/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27006119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.003137 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT truongquynha coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT schulmanmarcusjoshua coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT zakroyskypearl coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT chouerict coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT nagurneyjohnt coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT flegjeromel coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT schoenfelddavida coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT udelsonjamese coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT hoffmannudo coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial AT woodardpamelak coronaryctangiographyversusstandardemergencydepartmentevaluationforacutechestpainanddiabeticpatientsistherebenefitwithearlycoronaryctangiographyresultsoftherandomizedcomparativeeffectivenessromicatiitrial |