Effect of care guided by cardiovascular magnetic resonance, myocardial perfusion scintigraphy, or NICE guidelines on subsequent unnecessary angiography rates :The CE-MARC 2 randomized clinical trial

JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

Volumn 316, Issue 10, 2016, Pages 1051-1060

  Greenwood, John P ^a   Ripley, David P ^a   Berry, Colin ^b   McCann, Gerry P ^c,d   Plein, Sven ^a   Bucciarelli Ducci, Chiara ^e   Armellina, Erica Dall ^f   Prasad, Abhiram ^g   Bijsterveld, Petra ^a   Foley, James R ^a   Mangion, Kenneth ^b   Sculpher, Mark ^h   Walker, Simon ^h   Everett, Colin C ^a   Cairns, David A ^a   Sharples, Linda D ^a   Brown, Julia M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^d GLENFIELD HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^g ST GEORGE S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^h UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVERSE EFFECTS; AGED; ANGINA PECTORIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORONARY BLOOD VESSEL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; PATIENT CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; UNNECESSARY PROCEDURE;

AGED; ANGINA PECTORIS; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY STENOSIS; CORONARY VESSELS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; PATIENT CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; UNNECESSARY PROCEDURES;

EID: 84995944854     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.12680     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Greenwood JP, Maredia N, Younger JF, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography for diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CE-MARC). Lancet. 2012;379(9814):453-460.
2. Greenwood JP, Herzog BA, Brown JM, et al. Prognostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography in suspected coronary heart disease. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(1):1-9. doi:10.7326/M15-1801
3. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease. Circulation. 2012;126 (25):e354-e471.
4. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Chest pain of recent onset: assessment and diagnosis. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg95/resources/chest-pain-of-recent-onset-Assessment-And-diagnosis-975751034821. Accessed August 16, 2016.
5. Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2013;34 (38):2949-3003.
6. Hannan EL, Samadashvili Z, Cozzens K, et al. Appropriateness of diagnostic catheterization for suspected coronary artery disease in New York State. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7(1):19-27.
7. Patel MR, Dai D, Hernandez AF, et al. Prevalence and predictors of nonobstructive coronary artery disease identified with coronary angiography in contemporary clinical practice. Am Heart J. 2014; 167(6):846-852.e2.
8. Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(10):886-895.
9. Fox KA, McLean S. Nice guidance on the investigation of chest pain. Heart. 2010;96(12): 903-906.
10. Hendel RC, Berman DS, Di Carli MF, et al. ACCF/ASNC/ACR/AHA/ASE/SCCT/SCMR/SNM 2009 appropriate use criteria for cardiac radionuclide imaging. Circulation. 2009;119(22):e561-e587.
11. Ripley DP, Brown JM, Everett CC, et al. Rationale and design of the Clinical Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Coronary Heart Disease 2 trial (CE-MARC 2). Am Heart J. 2015;169(1):17-24.e1.
12. Pryor DB, Shaw L,McCants CB, et al. Value of the history and physical in identifying patients at increased risk for coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118(2):81-90.
13. Health and Social Care Information Centre. Ethnic category code. http://www.datadictionary .nhs.uk/data-dictionary/attributes/e/end/ethnic-category-code-de.asp. Accessed August 19, 2016.
14. Kuznetsova OM, Tymofyeyev Y. Preserving the allocation ratio at every allocation with biased coin randomization and minimization in studies with unequal allocation. Stat Med. 2012;31(8):701-723.
15. Kramer CM, Barkhausen J, Flamm SD, Kim RJ, Nagel E; Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Board of Trustees Task Force on Standardized Protocols. Standardized cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) protocols, society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2008;10:35.
16. Abbara S, Arbab-Zadeh A, Callister TQ, et al. SCCT guidelines for performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3(3):190-204.
17. Hesse B, Lindhardt TB, AcampaW, et al. EANM/ESC guidelines for radionuclide imaging of cardiac function. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(4):851-885.
18. Holly TA, Abbott BG, Al-Mallah M, et al. Single photon-emission computed tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17(5):941-973.
19. Fleiss JL, Tytun A, Ury HK. A simple approximation for calculating sample sizes for comparing independent proportions. Biometrics. 1980;36(2):343-346.
20. White IR, Royston P,Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations. Stat Med. 2011;30(4):377-399.
21. Rubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York, NY:Wiley; 1987.
22. Goff DC Jr, Lloyd-Jones DM, Bennett G, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk. J AmColl Cardiol. 2014;63(25 Pt B):2935-2959.
23. Schönenberger E, Schnapauff D, Teige F, Laule M, Hamm B, Dewey M. Patient acceptance of noninvasive and invasive coronary angiography. PLoS One. 2007;2(2):e246.
24. Diamond GA, Forrester JS. Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-Artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1979;300 (24):1350-1358.
25. Genders TSS, Steyerberg EW, Alkadhi H, et al. A clinical prediction rule for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2011;32(11): 1316-1330.
26. Cheng VY, Berman DS, Rozanski A, et al. Performance of the traditional age, sex, and angina typicality-based approach for estimating pretest probability of angiographically significant coronary artery disease in patients undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography. Circulation. 2011;124(22):2423-2432, 1-8.
27. Douglas PS, Hoffmann U, Patel MR, et al. Outcomes of anatomical versus functional testing for coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2015;372 (14):1291-1300.
28. Marwick TH, Cho I, O Hartaigh B, Min JK. Finding the gatekeeper to the cardiac catheterization laboratory. J AmColl Cardiol. 2015; 65(25):2747-2756.
29. Bradley SM, Spertus JA, Kennedy KF, et al. Patient selection for diagnostic coronary angiography and hospital-level percutaneous coronary intervention appropriateness. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(10):1630-1639.
30. ClinicalTrials.gov. International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01471522. Accessed August 16, 2016.