Key result
An anatomical strategy using CCTA is a reasonable alternative initial approach to functional testing for diagnosing ischaemic heart disease in intermediate-risk patients with stable chest pain.
Why the study?
Does an anatomical strategy using CCTA compare favorably to a functional strategy for the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease in intermediate-risk patients with stable chest pain?
Does an anatomical strategy using CCTA compare favorably to a functional strategy for the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease in intermediate-risk patients with stable chest pain?
Contemporary approaches for diagnosing ischemic heart disease should consider both functional and anatomical strategies in an integrated decision-making model.
Supports integrated anatomical-functional decision-making for ischemic heart disease; leaves open optimal strategy in prospective trials.
The prevalence of angina is high in the general population, and increases with age in both sexes. Little consensus exists about which test is preferable when one is required for diagnosis, including significant differences in the current US and European guidelines. However, the recent PROMISE and SCOT-HEART trials incorporating the use of CCTA have demonstrated that an anatomical strategy is a reasonable alternative initial approach to use in intermediate-risk patients with stable chest for the diagnosis of IHD. Contemporary approaches should therefore consider both functional and anatomical strategies in an integrated decision-making model.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fordyce et al. (2016) conducted a review in Ischaemic heart disease. Anatomical strategy (CCTA) vs. Functional strategy was evaluated. An anatomical strategy using CCTA is a reasonable alternative initial approach to functional testing for diagnosing ischaemic heart disease in intermediate-risk patients with stable chest pain.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: