Delewi, Ronak

Abstract Background Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) are guideline-recommended to assist in clinical decision-making in patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). However, the value of combining CCTA and MPI for guiding revascularization decision-making in post-CABG patients with recurrent ischemic symptoms remains unexplored. In this study, we compared Heart Team strategies for revascularization based on CCTA and MPI as standalone and hybrid CCTA/MPI imaging, to strategies guided by invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Methods We included symptomatic patients with prior CABG who underwent CCTA and MPI (single-photon emission computed tomography, positron emission tomography or stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging) preceding ICA. Simulated Heart Teams, blinded to other Heart teams and outcomes, performed revascularization decision-making based on conventional CCTA, MPI and a hybrid CCTA/MPI strategy (non-invasive Heart Team) or based on ICA (invasive Heart Team). The primary outcome was the Cohen’s kappa agreement (κ) between non-invasive and invasive Heart Teams. Results A total of 115 patients (mean age 73±7 years; 99 [86%] male) were included. Revascularization was recommended in 96 patients (83.5%) by CCTA, 92 patients (80.0%) by MPI, 80 patients (69.6%) by hybrid CCTA/MPI and 76 patients (66.1%) by ICA. The agreements were significant but low for CCTA (κ: 0.25 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.07-0.42], P=0.003) and MPI (κ: 0.27 [95% CI: 0.09-0.48], P=0.002) compared to ICA, with only a modest increase when using the hybrid non-invasive imaging strategy (κ: 0.32 [95% CI: 0.14-0.51], P<0.001). Conclusions In patients with recurrent ischemic symptoms after CABG, Heart Team assessment of conventional CCTA and MPI yielded similarly poor agreements with revascularization strategies based on ICA, with only a modest improvement observed when using a hybrid CCTA/MPI approach. Overall, non-invasive imaging alone appears insufficient to accurately guide treatment strategies in patients with prior CABG, and their use as gatekeeping for ICA in these patients should be questioned.

Abstract Background and Aims Invasive coronary function testing (CFT) identifies coronary vasomotor disorders in up to 90% of patients with angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA). The ILIAS ANOCA trial hypothesized that routine ad hoc CFT would be feasible, safe, and effective in providing an early, comprehensive diagnosis. Additionally, it was anticipated that combining CFT with a disease-specific treatment protocol would significantly improve quality of life in ANOCA patients compared with standard care. Methods After excluding patients with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) during clinically indicated invasive coronary angiography (ICA), eligible patients underwent CFT and were randomized to either the standard care group, where CFT results remained blinded, or the intervention group, where CFT results were disclosed along with a tailored medical therapy protocol. The primary outcome was the mean difference in the within-subject change in Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score (SAQSS) between groups from baseline to a follow-up of 6 months. The trial is registered with the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (NL-OMON20739). Results A total of 255 patients consented, of whom 153 patients (60%) without CAD underwent CFT and were randomized 1:1 to the standard care (n = 76) or intervention group (n = 77). All CFT procedures were successful without adverse events. A vasomotor disorder was identified in 120 patients (78%). At 6-month follow-up, the SAQSS improved significantly in the intervention group compared with the control group, with an intervention effect of 9.4 units (95% confidence interval 3.9–14.9, P = .001). There were no major adverse cardiac events at the 6-month follow-up. Conclusions Routine CFT during the initial ICA was feasible, safe, and had high diagnostic yield. Implementing a pragmatic CFT protocol combined with a disease-specific treatment protocol significantly improved disease-related quality of life in patients with ANOCA compared with standard care.