ll-Cause Mortality Benefit of Coronary Revascularization Vs. Medical Therapy in Patients Without Known Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography: Results from CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter Registry)

OBJECTIVES: To date, the therapeutic benefit of revascularization vs. medical therapy for stable individuals undergoing invasive coronary angiography (ICA) based upon coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) findings has not been examined.

METHODS: We examined 15 223 patientswithout known coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing CCTA from eight sites and six countries who were followed for median 2.1 years (interquartile range 1.4-3.3 years) for an endpoint of all-cause mortality. Obstructive CAD by CCTA was defined as a ≥50% luminal diameter stenosis in a major coronary artery. Patients were categorized as having high-risk CAD vs. non-high-risk CAD, with the former including patients with at least obstructive two-vessel CAD with proximal left anterior descending artery involvement, three-vessel CAD, and left main CAD.

RESULTS: Death occurred in 185 (1.2%) patients. Patients were categorized into two treatment groups: revascularization (n = 1103; 2.2% mortality) and medical therapy (n = 14 120, 1.1% mortality). To account for non-randomized referral to revascularization, we created a propensity score developed by logistic regression to identify variables that influenced the decision to refer to revascularization. Within this model (C index 0.92, χ2 = 1248, P < 0.0001), obstructive CAD was the most influential factor for referral, followed by an interaction of obstructive CAD with pre-test likelihood of CAD (P = 0.0344). Within CCTA CAD groups, rates of revascularization increased from 3.8% for non-high-risk CAD to 51.2% high-risk CAD. In multivariable models, when compared withmedical therapy, revascularization was associated with a survival advantage for patients with high-risk CAD [hazards ratio (HR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.83], with no difference in survival for patients with non-high-risk CAD (HR 3.24, 95% CI 0.76-13.89) (P-value for interaction = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS: In an intermediate-term follow-up, coronary revascularization is associated with a survival benefit in patients with high-risk CAD by CCTA, with no apparent benefit of revascularization in patients with lesser forms of CAD. Jordy Nelson Womens Jersey

PMID: 23048194

Posted in Computed Tomography and tagged , , , , , .

2 Comments

  1. A very large and purely anatomically-based study! (When the future trend of CCTA seems to point towards noninvasive FFR).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *