医学
冠状动脉疾病
狼牙棒
胸痛
内科学
混淆
放射科
危险系数
血管造影
倾向得分匹配
心脏病学
置信区间
心肌梗塞
经皮冠状动脉介入治疗
作者
Jia Zhou,Chunjie Li,Hong Zhang,Chang Liu,Junjie Yang,Jia Zhao,Yonghong Hou,Yahang Tan,Wang Hao,Yaoshuang Li,Cun Xie,Minghui Wang,Chengjian Wang,Enyuan Zhang,Shuo Wang,Pengyu Zhao,Dongkai Shan,Shuo Liang,Yufan Gao,Yong Huo,Hongliang Cong,Zhigang Guo,Yundai Chen
出处
期刊:Radiology
[Radiological Society of North America]
日期:2023-06-01
卷期号:307 (5)
被引量:6
标识
DOI:10.1148/radiol.222965
摘要
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.