Why the study?
The association between risk factor-weighted clinical likelihood (RF-CL) and angina relief following clinical decision-making based on coronary phenotyping remains unclear.
Does the risk factor-weighted clinical likelihood (RF-CL) model predict angina relief and CAD severity in stable patients with new-onset suspected chronic coronary syndrome?
Does the risk factor-weighted clinical likelihood (RF-CL) model predict angina relief and CAD severity in stable patients with new-onset suspected chronic coronary syndrome?
A strategy of testing deferral in patients with a risk factor-weighted clinical likelihood ≤5% may reduce unnecessary CCTA, as many become asymptomatic without intervention.
Background The risk factor-weighted clinical likelihood (RF-CL) model is endorsed as a tool for estimating the likelihood of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the association between RF-CL and angina relief following clinical decision-making based on coronary phenotyping remains unclear. Purpose To evaluate the association between RF-CL, CAD severity, and angina changes in patients with new-onset clinically suspected chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). Methods A total of 2,214 stable patients with new-onset chest pain and suspected CCS were included. At baseline, symptom burden was evaluated by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ), and patients underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Patients with ≥50% stenosis on CCTA were further investigated with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) using fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide decisions on revascularization. Follow-up SAQ was performed at 3 months. Patients were stratified into RF-CL categories reflecting European Society of Cardiology guideline-recommended RF-CL thresholds for test deferral/referral: ≤5%(very-low), >5-15%(low), and >15%(moderate/high). Additionally, patients were stratified by CAD severity based on the index CCTA and potential subsequent ICA with FFR and revascularization. Results At follow-up, 1,601 of 2,214 (72%) completed the SAQ. The SAQ frequency score improved in all RF-CL categories and CAD severities, except in patients with obstructive CAD at ICA who were not revascularized. In total, 630/1601 (39.7%) patients were angina-free at follow-up. In multivariate logistic regression analyses and compared to patients with RF-CL≤5%, patients with RF-CL>5-15% had higher odds of angina freedom at follow-up (OR 1.32 (CI95% 1.00–1.74), p=0.047), while patients with RF-CL>15% had similar odds (OR 0.98 (CI95% 0.71-1.37), p=0.93). Compared to patients with no CAD, patients with stenosis on CCTA without hemodynamical impairment had lower odds of angina freedom at follow-up (OR 0.50 (95% CI 0.34-0.74), p<0.001), while patients undergoing revascularization had higher odds (OR 2.78 (95%CI 1.36-0.68), p=0.005). In patients with no CAD (n=568, 35.5%)) or non-obstructive CAD (n=571, 35.7%) at CCTA, patients with RF-CL≤5% (n=496, 43.5%), RF-CL >5-15% (n=446, 39.2%), and RF-CL >15% (n=197, 17.3%) had similar rates of freedom from angina at follow-up (n=206/496, 41.5%, n=193/446, 43.3%, n=74/197, 37.6% for patients with RF-CL≤5%, >5-15%, and >15%, respectively)(fig. 2). Conclusion Low RF-CL values correctly identify patients with no CAD or non-obstructive CAD of whom 2 out of 5 patients will be angina-free at 3-month follow-up. Revascularization does improve the angina burden but was infrequently performed in patients with very-low(≤5%) RF-CL. These findings suggest that a strategy of testing deferral in patient with RF-CL≤5% can reduce the number of unnecessary CCTA as many of these patients become asymptomatic without intervention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sikjaer et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: