Why the study?
Heart failure in NSTE-ACS is associated with poor prognosis but often under-recognized, and CCTA contains cardiopulmonary features not routinely assessed for HF.
Does an artificial intelligence algorithm applied to CCTA predict heart failure in patients with NSTE-ACS?
Observational (n=1,009)
Blinded to CCTA findings
Yes
Does an artificial intelligence algorithm applied to CCTA predict heart failure in patients with NSTE-ACS?
Hazard Ratio: 5.39 (95% CI 2.32–12.5)
Absolute Event Rate: 7% vs 1%
p-value: p=<0.001
An AI algorithm applied to routine CCTA in NSTE-ACS patients can identify a subgroup at high risk for in-hospital and post-discharge heart failure.
May support AI-enhanced CCTA for inpatient HF risk assessment; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
Aims: Heart failure (HF) in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is associated with poor prognosis but often under-recognized. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), increasingly used in NSTE-ACS, contains cardiopulmonary features not routinely assessed for HF. We evaluated whether an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm applied to CCTA could identify HF likelihood in NSTE-ACS. Methods and results: In this retrospective external validation study, the AI algorithm was applied without retraining or recalibration to CCTA scans from 1009 patients with NSTE-ACS in the VERDICT trial. Using a pre-specified threshold, patients were classified as low or high AI likelihood of HF. The primary outcome was HF during index hospitalization. The secondary outcome was post-discharge HF hospitalization among patients discharged alive without HF, with analyses adjusted for global registry of acute coronary events score >140 and severe coronary artery disease. Death was treated as a competing risk. Overall, 838 patients (83%) were classified as low AI likelihood and 171 (17%) as high. During index hospitalization, HF was diagnosed in 10 patients (1%) with low AI likelihood and 12 (7%) with high. Sensitivity was 55%, specificity 84%, positive predictive value 7%, and negative predictive value 99%. High AI likelihood was associated with increased risk of index HF (subdistribution hazard ratio, 5.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.32-12.50). After discharge, HF hospitalization occurred in 25 patients (3%) with low AI likelihood and 14 (8%) with high. High AI likelihood remained associated with HF hospitalization (subdistribution hazard ratio 2.56, 95% CI 1.34-4.90). Conclusion: AI-based CCTA analysis identified a large low-risk subgroup and a smaller subgroup at increased HF risk, supporting further evaluation of opportunistic HF assessment from CCTA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Olesen et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) (n=1,009). High AI-derived likelihood of heart failure on CCTA vs. Low AI-derived likelihood of heart failure on CCTA was evaluated on Heart failure diagnosed during the index hospitalisation (sHR 5.39, 95% CI 2.32-12.50, p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: