Key result
Appropriate post-CCTA CAD-RADS 2.0 management is linked to ~66% lower MACE risk in CAD-RADS 1-2 disease.
Why the study?
CAD-RADS was developed to standardize disease management after CCTA, but the impact of CAD-RADS management recommendations on clinical outcomes remains unclear.
Does appropriate post-CCTA management according to CAD-RADS 2.0 reduce MACEs in patients with stable chest pain?
Cohort (n=14,232)
Does appropriate post-CCTA management according to CAD-RADS 2.0 reduce MACEs in patients with stable chest pain?
Adherence to CAD-RADS 2.0 management recommendations after CCTA is associated with a lower risk of MACEs and reduced use of invasive coronary angiography in patients with stable chest pain.
Appropriate post-CCTA management was associated with lower MACE; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
Background Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) was developed to standardize and optimize disease management in patients after coronary CT angiography (CCTA), but the impact of CAD-RADS management recommendations on clinical outcomes remains unclear. Purpose To retrospectively assess the association between the appropriateness of post-CCTA management according to CAD-RADS version 2.0 and clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods From January 2016 to January 2018, consecutive participants with stable chest pain referred for CCTA were prospectively included in a Chinese registry and followed for 4 years. Retrospectively, CAD-RADS 2.0 classification and the appropriateness of post-CCTA management were determined. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for confounding variables. Hazard ratios (HRs) for a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), relative risks for invasive coronary angiography (ICA), and the corresponding number needed to treat were estimated. Results Of the 14 232 included participants (mean age, 61 years ± 13 [SD]; 8852 male), 2330, 2756, and 2614 were retrospectively categorized in CAD-RADS 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Only 26% of participants with CAD-RADS 1–2 disease and 20% with CAD-RADS 3 received appropriate post-CCTA management. After PSM, appropriate post-CCTA management was associated with lower risk of MACEs (HR, 0.34; 95% CI: 0.22, 0.51; P < .001), corresponding to a number needed to treat of 21 in CAD-RADS 1–2 but not CAD-RADS 3 (HR, 0.86; 95% CI: 0.49, 1.85; P = .42). Appropriate post-CCTA management was associated with decreased use of ICA in CAD-RADS 1–2 (relative risk, 0.40; 95% CI: 0.29, 0.55; P < .001) and 3 (relative risk, 0.33; 95% CI: 0.28, 0.39; P < .001), resulting in a number needed to treat of 14 and 2, respectively. Conclusion In this retrospective secondary analysis, appropriate disease management after CCTA according to CAD-RADS 2.0 was associated with lower risk of MACEs and more prudent use of ICA. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT04691037 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Leipsic and Tzimas in this issue.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in stable chest pain (n=14,232). Appropriate post-CCTA management according to CAD-RADS 2.0 vs. Inappropriate post-CCTA management was evaluated on major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.22, 0.51, p=< .001). Appropriate post-CCTA management according to CAD-RADS 2.0 was associated with a lower risk of MACEs in patients with CAD-RADS 1-2 disease (HR 0.34; 95% CI 0.22-0.51; P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: