English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background— Limited data exist on how noninvasive testing options compare for evaluating patients with suspected stable coronary artery disease. In this study, we have performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the use of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) with usual care.Methods and Results— We systematically searched databases for randomized clinical trials comparing coronary CTA with usual care for the evaluation of stable chest pain with follow-up for cardiovascular outcomes. The primary outcomes were myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality. We identified 4 randomized clinical trials, including a total of 7403 patients undergoing coronary CTA and 7414 patients undergoing usual care with various functional testing approaches. When compared with usual care, the use of coronary CTA was associated with a significant reduction in the annual rate of myocardial infarction (rate ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.49–0.98; P =0.038), but no difference was found in all-cause mortality. There was a trend toward more invasive coronary angiographies among patients undergoing coronary CTA (odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.95–1.84; P =0.09) and higher use of coronary revascularizations (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.14–2.75). Significant heterogeneity for invasive coronary angiography and revascularization was noted, which was attributable to the Scottish Computed Tomography of the HEART (SCOT-HEART) study. We found no difference in the rate of admission for cardiac chest pain (rate ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.95–1.54).Conclusions— In comparison to usual care, an initial investigation of suspected stable coronary artery disease using coronary CTA resulted in a significant reduction in myocardial infarction, an increased incidence of coronary revascularization, and no effect in all-cause mortality. Future studies should further define whether the potential reduction in myocardial infarction identified justifies the increased resource utilization associated with coronary CTA.

Clinical Outcomes After Evaluation of Stable Chest Pain by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography Versus Usual Care