Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
This study aimed to determine the impact of systematic coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) use following an abnormal non-invasive ischemia test (NIST) on patient selection strategy for invasive coronary angiography (ICA). In patients with suspected stable coronary artery disease (CAD), NIST use frequently results in sub-optimal diagnostic and revascularization yields of ICA. This randomized clinical trial, conducted at a single academic tertiary center, selected 220 symptomatic patients with mild-to-moderately abnormal NIST results who were referred for ICA. Patients received either the originally intended ICA (n = 105) or CCTA (n = 115). The primary endpoint was the diagnostic yield of ICA in each group. Revascularization yield and major adverse cardiovascular events at 12 months were also assessed. The patients were 69 ± 9 years old, 60% were men, and 31% had typical angina. Mean pre-test probability of obstructive CAD was 34%. Overall prevalence of obstructive CAD was 37.7% on the index angiographic procedure. In the CCTA group, ICA was cancelled by referring physicians in 83 patients (72.2%) after receiving CCTA results. For those undergoing ICA, diagnostic (84.4% vs. 41.7%, p<0.001) and revascularization (71.9% vs. 38.8%, p = 0.001) yields were significantly higher for CCTA-guided ICA than for standard NIST-guided ICA. Mean cumulative radiation exposure was significantly lower in the CCTA-guided ICA arm than in the NIST-guided ICA arm (12 ± 9 vs. 16 ± 10 mSv, respectively, p = 0.024). There were no significant differences in the primary safety endpoint rates between the strategies (p = 0.439). In patients with suspected CAD and mild-to-moderately abnormal ischemia tests, a diagnostic strategy including CCTA as a gatekeeper is safe and effective and significantly improves diagnostic and revascularization yields of ICA.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10554-021-02426-6 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!