Coronary CT angiography versus myocardial perfusion imaging for near-term quality of life, cost and radiation exposure: A prospective multicenter randomized pilot trial

James K. Min, Sunaina Koduru, Allison M. Dunning, Jason H. Cole, Jerome L. Hines, Dawn Greenwell, Cathie Biga, Gayle Fanning, Troy M. LaBounty, Millie Gomez, James M. Horowitz, Martin Hadimitzsky, Jorg Hausleiter, Tracy Q. Callister, Alan R. Rosanski, Leslee J. Shaw, Daniel S. Berman, Fay Y. Lin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

68 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Clinical outcomes and resource utilization after coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) versus myocardial perfusion single-photon emission CT (MPS) in patients with stable angina and suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been examined. Objective: We determined the near-term clinical effect and resource utilization after cardiac CTA compared with MPS. Methods: We randomly assigned 180 patients (age, 57.3 ± 9.8 years; 50.6% men) presenting with stable chest pain and suspected CAD at 2 sites to initial diagnostic evaluation by coronary CTA (n = 91) or MPS (n = 89). The primary outcome was near-term angina-specific health status; the secondary outcomes were incident medical and invasive treatments for CAD, CAD health care costs, and estimated radiation dose. Results: No patients experienced myocardial infarction or death with 98.3% follow-up at 55 ± 34 days. Both arms experienced comparable improvements in angina-specific health status. Patients who received coronary CTA had increased incident aspirin (22% vs 8%; P = 0.04) and statin (7% vs -3.5%; P = 0.03) use, similar rates of CAD-related hospitalization, invasive coronary angiography, noninvasive cardiac imaging tests, and increased revascularization (8% vs 1%; P = 0.03). Coronary CTA had significantly lower total costs ($781.08 [interquartile range (IQR), $367.80-$4349.48] vs $1214.58 [IQR, $978.02-$1569.40]; P < 0.001) with no difference in induced costs. Coronary CTA had a significantly lower total estimated effective radiation dose (7.4 mSv [IQR, 5.0-14.0 mSv] vs 13.3 mSv [IQR, 13.1-38.0 mSv]; P < 0.0001) with no difference in induced radiation. Conclusion: In a pilot randomized controlled trial, patients with stable CAD undergoing coronary CTA and MPS experience comparable improvements in near-term angina-related quality of life. Compared with MPS, coronary CTA evaluation is associated with more aggressive medical therapy, increased coronary revascularization, lower total costs, and lower effective radiation dose.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)274-283
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
Volume6
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2012
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Computed tomography
  • Myocardial perfusion SPECT
  • Radiation exposure
  • Randomized trial
  • Resource utilization

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Coronary CT angiography versus myocardial perfusion imaging for near-term quality of life, cost and radiation exposure: A prospective multicenter randomized pilot trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this