Eric T. Chou

Coronary CT Angiography versus Standard Evaluation in Acute Chest Pain

BACKGROUND It is unclear whether an evaluation incorporating coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) is more effective than standard evaluation in the emergency department in patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndromes. METHODS In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned patients 40 to 74 years of age with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndromes but without ischemic electrocardiographic changes or an initial positive troponin test to early CCTA or to standard evaluation in the emergency department on weekdays during daylight hours between April 2010 and January 2012. The primary end point was length of stay in the hospital. Secondary end points included rates of discharge from the emergency department, major adverse cardiovascular events at 28 days, and cumulative costs. Safety end points were undetected acute coronary syndromes. RESULTS The rate of acute coronary syndromes among 1000 patients with a mean (±SD) age of 54±8 years (47% women) was 8%. After early CCTA, as compared with standard evaluation, the mean length of stay in the hospital was reduced by 7.6 hours (P<0.001) and more patients were discharged directly from the emergency department (47% vs. 12%, P<0.001). There were no undetected acute coronary syndromes and no significant differences in major adverse cardiovascular events at 28 days. After CCTA, there was more downstream testing and higher radiation exposure. The cumulative mean cost of care was similar in the CCTA group and the standard-evaluation group (

Sex Differences in the Effectiveness of Early Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography Compared With Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain The Rule-Out Myocardial Infarction With Computer-Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT)-II Trial

4,289 and

Use of Coronary Artery Calcium Scanning Beyond Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography in the Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain The ROMICAT II Trial

4,060, respectively; P=0.65). CONCLUSIONS In patients in the emergency department with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndromes, incorporating CCTA into a triage strategy improved the efficiency of clinical decision making, as compared with a standard evaluation in the emergency department, but it resulted in an increase in downstream testing and radiation exposure with no decrease in the overall costs of care. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ROMICAT-II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01084239.).

Coronary CT Angiography Versus Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain and Diabetic Patients: Is There Benefit With Early Coronary CT Angiography?: Results of the Randomized Comparative Effectiveness ROMICAT II Trial

Background— We evaluate sex-based differences in the effectiveness of early cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) and standard emergency department (ED) evaluation in patients with acute chest pain. Methods and Results— In the Rule-Out Myocardial Infarction With Computer-Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT)-II multicenter, controlled trial, we randomized 1000 patients (47% women) 40 to 74 years of age with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome to an early CCTA or standard ED evaluation. In this prespecified analysis, women in the CCTA arm had a greater reduction in length of stay, lower hospital admission rates, and lesser increased cumulative radiation dose than men in a comparison of ED strategies (P for interaction ⩽0.02). Although women had lower acute coronary syndrome rates than men (3% versus 12%; P<0.0001), sex differences in length of stay persisted after adjustment for baseline differences, including acute coronary syndrome rate (P for interaction <0.03). Length of stay was similar between sexes with normal CCTA findings (P=0.11). There was no missed acute coronary syndrome for either sex. No difference was observed in major adverse cardiac events between sexes and ED strategies (P for interaction =0.39). Women had more normal CCTA examinations than men (58% versus 37%; P<0.0001), less obstructive coronary disease by CCTA (5% versus 17%; P=0.0001), but similar normalcy rates for functional testing (P=0.65). Men in the CCTA arm had the highest rate of invasive coronary angiography (18%), whereas women had comparable low 5% rates regardless of ED strategy. Conclusions— This trial provides data supporting an early CCTA strategy as an attractive option in women presenting to the ED with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome. The findings may be explained by lower CAD prevalence and severity in women than men. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01084239.Background We evaluate sex-based differences in the effectiveness of early cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) versus standard emergency department (ED) evaluation in patients with acute chest pain.

Ablation of isthmus and non-isthmus-dependent flutters in a patient with cor triatriatum dexter.

Background—Whether a coronary artery calcium (CAC) scan provides added value to coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) in emergency department patients with acute chest pain remains unsettled. We sought to determine the value of CAC scan in patients with acute chest pain undergoing CCTA. Methods and Results—In the multicenter Rule Out Myocardial Infarction using Computer-Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT) II trial, we enrolled low-intermediate risk emergency department patients with symptoms suggesting acute coronary syndrome (ACS). In this prespecified subanalysis of 473 patients (54±8 years, 53% men) who underwent both CAC scanning and CCTA, the ACS rate was 8%. Overall, 53% of patients had CAC=0 of whom 2 (0.8%) developed ACS, whereas 7% had CAC>400 with 49% whom developed ACS. C-statistic of CAC>0 was 0.76, whereas that using the optimal cut point of CAC≥22 was 0.81. Continuous CAC score had lower discriminatory capacity than CCTA (c-statistic, 0.86 versus 0.92; P=0.03). Compared with CCTA alone, there was no benefit combining CAC score with CCTA (c-statistic, 0.93; P=0.88) or with selective CCTA strategies after initial CAC>0 or optimal cut point CAC≥22 (P≥0.09). Mean radiation dose from CAC acquisition was 1.4±0.7 mSv. Higher CAC scores resulted in more nondiagnostic CCTA studies although the majority remained interpretable. Conclusions—In emergency department patients with acute chest pain, CAC score does not provide incremental value beyond CCTA for ACS diagnosis. CAC=0 does not exclude ACS, nor a high CAC score preclude interpretation of CCTA in most patients. Thus, CAC results should not influence the decision to proceed with CCTA, and the decision to perform a CAC scan should be balanced with the additional radiation exposure required. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01084239.

Utility of Coronary Artery Calcium Scanning Beyond Coronary CT Angiography in the Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain: The ROMICAT II Trial

Background Cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) reduces emergency department length of stay compared with standard evaluation in patients with low‐ and intermediate‐risk acute chest pain. Whether diabetic patients have similar benefits is unknown. Methods and Results In this prespecified analysis of the Rule Out Myocardial Ischemia/Infarction by Computer Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT II) multicenter trial, we randomized 1000 patients (17% diabetic) with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome to CCTA or standard evaluation. The rate of acute coronary syndrome was 8% in both diabetic and nondiabetic patients (P=1.0). Length of stay was unaffected by the CCTA strategy for diabetic patients (23.9 versus 27.2 hours, P=0.86) but was reduced for nondiabetic patients compared with standard evaluation (8.4 versus 26.5 hours, P<0.0001; P interaction=0.004). CCTA resulted in 3‐fold more direct emergency department discharge in both groups (each P≤0.0001, P interaction=0.27). No difference in hospital admissions was seen between the 2 strategies in diabetic and nondiabetic patients (P interaction=0.09). Both groups had more downstream testing and higher radiation doses with CCTA, but these were highest in diabetic patients (all P interaction≤0.04). Diabetic patients had fewer normal CCTAs than nondiabetic patients (32% versus 50%, P=0.003) and similar normalcy rates with standard evaluation (P=0.70). Notably, 66% of diabetic patients had no or mild stenosis by CCTA with short length of stay comparable to that of nondiabetic patients (P=0.34), whereas those with >50% stenosis had a high prevalence of acute coronary syndrome, invasive coronary angiography, and revascularization. Conclusions Knowledge of coronary anatomy with CCTA is beneficial for diabetic patients and can discriminate between lower risk patients with no or little coronary artery disease who can be discharged immediately and higher risk patients with moderate to severe disease who warrant further workup. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01084239.

Use of Coronary Artery Calcium Scanning Beyond Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography in the Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain

A 59-year-old man who had repair of ventricular septal defect was referred for ablation of typical atrial flutter (AFL). Due to an unusual high posterior ‘ridge’, positioning of the catheters was difficult, and medial/midline isthmus ablation with an 8 mm tip large curve …

Statin Use Is Associated With Fewer High-Risk Plaques on Coronary CT Angiography

Background—Whether a coronary artery calcium (CAC) scan provides added value to coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) in emergency department patients with acute chest pain remains unsettled. We sought to determine the value of CAC scan in patients with acute chest pain undergoing CCTA. Methods and Results—In the multicenter Rule Out Myocardial Infarction using Computer-Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT) II trial, we enrolled low-intermediate risk emergency department patients with symptoms suggesting acute coronary syndrome (ACS). In this prespecified subanalysis of 473 patients (54±8 years, 53% men) who underwent both CAC scanning and CCTA, the ACS rate was 8%. Overall, 53% of patients had CAC=0 of whom 2 (0.8%) developed ACS, whereas 7% had CAC>400 with 49% whom developed ACS. C-statistic of CAC>0 was 0.76, whereas that using the optimal cut point of CAC≥22 was 0.81. Continuous CAC score had lower discriminatory capacity than CCTA (c-statistic, 0.86 versus 0.92; P=0.03). Compared with CCTA alone, there was no benefit combining CAC score with CCTA (c-statistic, 0.93; P=0.88) or with selective CCTA strategies after initial CAC>0 or optimal cut point CAC≥22 (P≥0.09). Mean radiation dose from CAC acquisition was 1.4±0.7 mSv. Higher CAC scores resulted in more nondiagnostic CCTA studies although the majority remained interpretable. Conclusions—In emergency department patients with acute chest pain, CAC score does not provide incremental value beyond CCTA for ACS diagnosis. CAC=0 does not exclude ACS, nor a high CAC score preclude interpretation of CCTA in most patients. Thus, CAC results should not influence the decision to proceed with CCTA, and the decision to perform a CAC scan should be balanced with the additional radiation exposure required. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01084239.

Use of Coronary Artery Calcium Scanning Beyond Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography in the Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest PainCLINICAL PERSPECTIVE: The ROMICAT II Trial

Background—Whether a coronary artery calcium (CAC) scan provides added value to coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) in emergency department patients with acute chest pain remains unsettled. We sought to determine the value of CAC scan in patients with acute chest pain undergoing CCTA. Methods and Results—In the multicenter Rule Out Myocardial Infarction using Computer-Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT) II trial, we enrolled low-intermediate risk emergency department patients with symptoms suggesting acute coronary syndrome (ACS). In this prespecified subanalysis of 473 patients (54±8 years, 53% men) who underwent both CAC scanning and CCTA, the ACS rate was 8%. Overall, 53% of patients had CAC=0 of whom 2 (0.8%) developed ACS, whereas 7% had CAC>400 with 49% whom developed ACS. C-statistic of CAC>0 was 0.76, whereas that using the optimal cut point of CAC≥22 was 0.81. Continuous CAC score had lower discriminatory capacity than CCTA (c-statistic, 0.86 versus 0.92; P=0.03). Compared with CCTA alone, there was no benefit combining CAC score with CCTA (c-statistic, 0.93; P=0.88) or with selective CCTA strategies after initial CAC>0 or optimal cut point CAC≥22 (P≥0.09). Mean radiation dose from CAC acquisition was 1.4±0.7 mSv. Higher CAC scores resulted in more nondiagnostic CCTA studies although the majority remained interpretable. Conclusions—In emergency department patients with acute chest pain, CAC score does not provide incremental value beyond CCTA for ACS diagnosis. CAC=0 does not exclude ACS, nor a high CAC score preclude interpretation of CCTA in most patients. Thus, CAC results should not influence the decision to proceed with CCTA, and the decision to perform a CAC scan should be balanced with the additional radiation exposure required. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01084239.

Sex Differences in the Effectiveness of Early Coronary CT Angiography Compared to Standard Emergency Department Evaluation for Acute Chest Pain: The ROMICAT II Trial

Although there is an ongoing debate whether the detection of individual high-risk plaques (HRP) may help to improve patient outcomes, emerging data from coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) studies suggest that the presence of HRP features (i.e., positive remodeling and low CT plaque