Incremental Prognostic Value of Cardiac Computed Tomography in Coronary Artery Disease Using CONFIRM: COroNary Computed Tomography Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter Registry

Background— Large multicenter studies validating the prognostic value of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are lacking. We sought to confirm the independent and incremental prognostic value of coronary artery disease (CAD) severity measured using 64-slice CCTA over LVEF and clinical variables. Methods and Results— A large international multicenter registry (CONFIRM Registry) was queried, and CCTA patients with LVEF data on CCTA were screened. Patients with a history of myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or cardiac transplantation were excluded. The National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III risk was calculated for each patient, and CCTA was evaluated for CAD severity (normal, nonobstructive, non–high-risk, or high-risk CAD) and LVEF <50%. Patients were followed for an end point of all-cause mortality; 27 125 patients underwent CCTA at 12 participating centers, with a total of 14 064 patients meeting the analysis criteria. Follow-up was available for 13 966 (99.3%) patients (mean follow-up of 22.5 months; 95% confidence interval, 22.3 to 22.7 months). All-cause mortality (271 deaths) occurred in 0.65% of patients without coronary atherosclerosis, 1.99% of patients with nonobstructive CAD, 2.90% of patients with non–high-risk CAD, and 4.95% for patients with high-risk CAD. Multivariable analysis confirmed that LVEF <50% (hazard ratio, 2.74; 95% confidence interval, 2.12 to 3.51) and CAD severity (hazard ratio,1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.42 to 1.76) were predictors of all-cause mortality, and CAD severity had incremental value over LVEF and clinical variables. Conclusions— Our results demonstrate that CCTA measures of CAD severity and LVEF have independent prognostic value. Incorporation of CAD severity provides incremental value for predicting all-cause death over routine clinical predictors and LVEF in patients with suspected obstructive CAD.

[1]  B. Chow,et al.  Diagnostic Accuracy and Impact of Computed Tomographic Coronary Angiography on Utilization of Invasive Coronary Angiography , 2009, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[2]  Sankey V. Williams,et al.  ACC/AHA/ACP-ASIM guidelines for the management of patients with chronic stable angina: executive summary and recommendations. A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients with Chronic Stable Angina). , 1999, Circulation.

[3]  T. Flohr,et al.  Dual-source CT assessment of ventricular function in healthy and infarcted myocardium: an animal study. , 2011, European journal of radiology.

[4]  Mario J. Garcia,et al.  ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization , 2009, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[5]  D. Berman,et al.  Prognostic value of multidetector coronary computed tomographic angiography for prediction of all-cause mortality. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[6]  M. Hadamitzky,et al.  Prognostic value of coronary computed tomographic angiography in asymptomatic patients. , 2010, The American journal of cardiology.

[7]  Klaus Mann,et al.  Coronary risk stratification, discrimination, and reclassification improvement based on quantification of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis: the Heinz Nixdorf Recall study. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[8]  Lippincott Williams Wilkins,et al.  ACC/AHA 2004 Guideline Update for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery , 2004 .

[9]  J. Spertus,et al.  ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 Appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Am , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  K. Kent,et al.  Five-Year Follow-Up After Intracoronary Gamma Radiation Therapy for In-Stent Restenosis , 2004, Circulation.

[11]  H. Alkadhi,et al.  Coronary 64-slice CT angiography predicts outcome in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease , 2008, European Radiology.

[12]  B. Chow,et al.  Prognostic value of 64-slice cardiac computed tomography severity of coronary artery disease, coronary atherosclerosis, and left ventricular ejection fraction. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[13]  Filippo Cademartiri,et al.  Functional parameters of the left ventricle: comparison of cardiac MRI and cardiac CT in a large population , 2010, La radiologia medica.

[14]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[15]  M. Gilard,et al.  Midterm prognosis of patients with suspected coronary artery disease and normal multislice computed tomographic findings: a prospective management outcome study. , 2007, Archives of internal medicine.

[16]  R. Günther,et al.  Left Ventricular Function Can Reliably be Assessed From Dual-Source CT Using ECG-Gated Tube Current Modulation , 2009, Investigative radiology.

[17]  Jörg Hausleiter,et al.  Prognostic value of coronary computed tomographic angiography for prediction of cardiac events in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. , 2009, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[18]  M. Budoff,et al.  Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Indi , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[19]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Meta-analysis of comparative diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging and multislice computed tomography for noninvasive coronary angiography. , 2006, American heart journal.

[20]  D. Berman,et al.  Cardiac chamber volumes, function, and mass as determined by 64-multidetector row computed tomography: mean values among healthy adults free of hypertension and obesity. , 2008, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[21]  Udo Hoffmann,et al.  Computed tomographic coronary angiography: an alternative to invasive coronary angiography. , 2005, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[22]  Udo Hoffmann,et al.  Predictive Value of 16-Slice Multidetector Spiral Computed Tomography to Detect Significant Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Patients at High Risk for Coronary Artery Disease: Patient- Versus Segment-Based Analysis , 2004, Circulation.

[23]  E. DeLong,et al.  Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. , 1988, Biometrics.

[24]  M. Pencina,et al.  Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: From area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[25]  Ammar Sarwar,et al.  Evaluating global and regional left ventricular function in patients with reperfused acute myocardial infarction by 64-slice multidetector CT: a comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. , 2009, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[26]  Marco Valgimigli,et al.  Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared with conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[27]  B. Chow,et al.  CCS/CAR/CANM/CNCS/CanSCMR joint position statement on advanced noninvasive cardiac imaging using positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and multidetector computed tomographic angiography in the diagnosis and evaluation of ischemic heart disease--executive summary. , 2007, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[28]  G. Diamond,et al.  Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. , 1979, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  W. Rogers,et al.  Angiographic Prevalence of High‐risk Coronary Artery Disease in Patient Subsets (CASS) , 1981, Circulation.

[30]  Ioannis Kakadiaris,et al.  Mortality incidence and the severity of coronary atherosclerosis assessed by computed tomography angiography. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[31]  Fuminari Tatsugami,et al.  Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. , 2007, European heart journal.

[32]  S. Abbara.  SCCT guidelines for performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography: A report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee , 2010 .