Alpha 2.0

» Articles » PMID: 30660516

Superior Risk Stratification With Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Using a Comprehensive Atherosclerotic Risk Score

Overview

Overview

Journal JACC Cardiovasc Imaging

Publisher Elsevier

Specialties Cardiology & Vascular Diseases
Radiology

Date 2019 Jan 21

PMID 30660516

Citations 40

Authors

Authors

Alexander R van Rosendael

Leslee J Shaw

Joe X Xie

Aukelien C Dimitriu-Leen

Jeff M Smit

Arthur J Scholte

Jacob M Van Werkhoven

Tracy Q Callister

Augustin DeLago

Daniel S Berman

Martin Hadamitzky

Jeorg Hausleiter

Mouaz H Al-Mallah

Matthew J Budoff

Philipp A Kaufmann

Gilbert Raff

Kavitha Chinnaiyan

Filippo Cademartiri

Erica Maffei

Todd C Villines

Yong-Jin Kim

Gudrun Feuchtner

Fay Y Lin

Erica C Jones

Gianluca Pontone

Daniele Andreini

Hugo Marques

Ronen Rubinshtein

Stephan Achenbach

Allison Dunning

Millie Gomez

Niree Hindoyan

Heidi Gransar

Jonathon Leipsic

Jagat Narula

James K Min

Jeroen J Bax

Affiliations

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: This study was designed to assess the prognostic value of a new comprehensive coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) score compared with the stenosis severity component of the Coronary Artery Disease-Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS).

Background: Current risk assessment with coronary CTA is mainly focused on maximal stenosis severity. Integration of plaque extent, location, and composition in a comprehensive model may improve risk stratification.

Methods: A total of 2,134 patients with suspected but without known CAD were included. The predictive value of the comprehensive CTA score (ranging from 0 to 42 and divided into 3 groups: 0 to 5, 6 to 20, and >20) was compared with the CAD-RADS combined into 3 groups (0% to 30%, 30% to 70% and ≥70% stenosis). Its predictive performance was internally and externally validated (using the 5-year follow-up dataset of the CONFIRM [Coronary CT Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: An International Multicenter Registry], n = 1,971).

Results: The mean age of patients was 55 ± 13 years, mean follow-up 3.6 ± 2.8 years, and 130 events (myocardial infarction or death) occurred. The new, comprehensive CTA score showed strong and independent predictive value using the Cox proportional hazard analysis. A model including clinical variables plus comprehensive CTA score showed better discrimination of events compared with a model consisting of clinical variables plus CAD-RADS (0.768 vs. 0.742, p = 0.001). Also, the comprehensive CTA score correctly reclassified a significant proportion of patients compared with the CAD-RADS (net reclassification improvement 12.4%, p < 0.001). Good predictive accuracy was reproduced in the external validation cohort.

Conclusions: The new comprehensive CTA score provides better discrimination and reclassification of events compared with the CAD-RADS score based on stenosis severity only. The score retained similar prognostic accuracy when externally validated. Anatomic risk scores can be improved with the addition of extent, location, and compositional measures of atherosclerotic plaque. (Comprehensive CTA risk score calculator is available at: http://18.224.14.19/calcApp/).

Citing Articles

Incremental value of physiological indices to predict high-risk plaques detected by NIRS-IVUS.

Kakehi K, Ueno M, Yamada N, Onishi K, Sugimoto K, Funauchi Y Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2025; .

PMID: 40072703 DOI: 10.1007/s12928-025-01116-7.

Coronary CT angiography alone versus with CT perfusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing approaches for chest pain.

DAscenzo F, Faletti R, Di Pietro G, Improta R, Bruno F, Schoepf U Eur Radiol. 2025; .

PMID: 40055231 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-025-11459-7.

Health improvements by understanding residual risk in coronary artery disease and new targets for prevention/treatment: rationale and research protocol of the HURRICANE project.

Caselli C, Occhipinti M, Pane K, De Gori C, Rocchiccioli S, Botto N Eur Heart J Open. 2025; 5(1):oeaf005.

PMID: 39949422 PMC: 11823827. DOI: 10.1093/ehjopen/oeaf005.

Prognostic value of coronary plaque composition in symptomatic patients with obstructive coronary artery disease.

Gall E, Pezel T, Toupin S, Hovasse T, Unterseeh T, Chevalier B Eur Radiol. 2025; .

PMID: 39853336 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-025-11353-2.

The Role of Cardiac Computed Tomography Angiography in Risk Stratification for Coronary Artery Disease.

van Rosendael S, Shiyovich A, Cardoso R, Souza Freire C, van Rosendael A, Lin F J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2024; 3(11):102230.

PMID: 39649823 PMC: 11624369. DOI: 10.1016/j.jscai.2024.102230.

References

1.

Bittencourt M, Hulten E, Ghoshhajra B, OLeary D, Christman M, Montana P . Prognostic value of nonobstructive and obstructive coronary artery disease detected by coronary computed tomography angiography to identify cardiovascular events. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014; 7(2):282-91. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.113.001047. View

2.

Meijboom W, Meijs M, Schuijf J, Cramer M, Mollet N, van Mieghem C . Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52(25):2135-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.08.058. View

3.

de Graaf F, Schuijf J, van Velzen J, Kroft L, de Roos A, Reiber J . Diagnostic accuracy of 320-row multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography in the non-invasive evaluation of significant coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2010; 31(15):1908-15. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehp571. View

4.

Pencina M, DAgostino Sr R, DAgostino Jr R, Vasan R . Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med. 2007; 27(2):157-72. DOI: 10.1002/sim.2929. View

5.

Deseive S, Shaw L, Min J, Achenbach S, Andreini D, Al-Mallah M . Improved 5-year prediction of all-cause mortality by coronary CT angiography applying the CONFIRM score. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017; 18(3):286-293. PMC: 5837486. DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jew195. View

6.

Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet J, Mueller C, Valgimigli M, Andreotti F . 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment.... Eur Heart J. 2015; 37(3):267-315. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv320. View

7.

Giroud D, Li J, Urban P, Meier B, Rutishauer W . Relation of the site of acute myocardial infarction to the most severe coronary arterial stenosis at prior angiography. Am J Cardiol. 1992; 69(8):729-32. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(92)90495-k. View

8.

Austen W, Edwards J, Frye R, Gensini G, Gott V, Griffith L . A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation. 1975; 51(4 Suppl):5-40. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.51.4.5. View

9.

Mark D, Nelson C, Califf R, Harrell Jr F, Lee K, Jones R . Continuing evolution of therapy for coronary artery disease. Initial results from the era of coronary angioplasty. Circulation. 1994; 89(5):2015-25. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.89.5.2015. View

10.

Motoyama S, Ito H, Sarai M, Kondo T, Kawai H, Nagahara Y . Plaque Characterization by Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography and the Likelihood of Acute Coronary Events in Mid-Term Follow-Up. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 66(4):337-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.069. View

11.

Polonsky T, McClelland R, Jorgensen N, Bild D, Burke G, Guerci A . Coronary artery calcium score and risk classification for coronary heart disease prediction. JAMA. 2010; 303(16):1610-6. PMC: 3033741. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2010.461. View

12.

Min J, Dunning A, Lin F, Achenbach S, Al-Mallah M, Berman D . Rationale and design of the CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter) Registry. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011; 5(2):84-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2011.01.007. View

13.

Chaitman B, Thygesen K, Alpert J, White H, Jaffe A, Katus H . Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2012; 33(20):2551-67. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs184. View

14.

Mushtaq S, de Araujo Goncalves P, Garcia-Garcia H, Pontone G, Bartorelli A, Bertella E . Long-term prognostic effect of coronary atherosclerotic burden: validation of the computed tomography-Leaman score. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 8(2):e002332. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.114.002332. View

15.

Cheezum M, Hulten E, Smith R, Taylor A, Kircher J, Surry L . Changes in preventive medical therapies and CV risk factors after CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 6(5):574-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.11.016. View

16.

DeLong E, Delong D, Clarke-Pearson D . Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988; 44(3):837-45. View

17.

Pundziute G, Schuijf J, Jukema J, Boersma E, de Roos A, van der Wall E . Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 49(1):62-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.07.070. View

18.

Carrigan T, Nair D, Schoenhagen P, Curtin R, Popovic Z, Halliburton S . Prognostic utility of 64-slice computed tomography in patients with suspected but no documented coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2009; 30(3):362-71. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn605. View

19.

Van Werkhoven J, Schuijf J, Gaemperli O, Jukema J, Kroft L, Boersma E . Incremental prognostic value of multi-slice computed tomography coronary angiography over coronary artery calcium scoring in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2009; 30(21):2622-9. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehp272. View

20.

Hadamitzky M, Achenbach S, Al-Mallah M, Berman D, Budoff M, Cademartiri F . Optimized prognostic score for coronary computed tomographic angiography: results from the CONFIRM registry (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter Registry). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 62(5):468-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.04.064. View