Scottish Computed Tomography of the HEART - SCOT-HEART
Contribution To Literature:
The SCOT-HEART trial showed that coronary CTA is an alternative to standard care in the evaluation of low- to intermediate-risk patients with chest pain.
The goal of the trial was to evaluate coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) compared with standard care among low- to intermediate-risk patients with chest pain suggestive of obstructive coronary disease.
Low- to intermediate-risk patients with chest pain were randomized to evaluation with coronary CTA (n = 2,073) versus standard care (n = 2,073).
- Total number of enrollees: 4,146
- Duration of follow-up: median 1.7 years
- Mean patient age: 57 years
- Percentage female: 44%
- Percentage diabetics: 11%
- Baseline exercise electrocardiography (ECG) was performed in 85% of subjects in both groups (abnormal in 15% of subjects in both groups)
- Subsequent stress imaging was performed in 9% of the coronary CTA group vs. 10% of the standard care group
- Median radiation dose = 4.1 mSv
- Patients 18-75 years of age with chest pain suggestive of coronary disease
- Inability to undergo coronary CTA
- Renal failure
- Contrast allergy
- Acute coronary syndrome within last 3 months
- CTA increased certainty in the diagnosis of angina due to coronary heart disease (CHD) (relative risk [RR] = 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.62-1.96, p < 0.001) vs. standard care
- CTA reduced frequency of the diagnosis of angina due to CHD (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.85-1.02, p = 0.13) vs. standard care
- Coronary revascularization: 11.2% vs. 9.7% (p = 0.061), respectively, for CTA vs. standard care
- CHD death or myocardial infarction (MI): 1.3% vs. 2.0% (p = 0.053), respectively, for CTA vs. standard care
- Change in physical limitation at 6 months: 1.6 vs. 3.0 (p = 0.03), respectively, for CTA vs. standard care
- Change in angina stability at 6 months: 13.4 vs. 12.5 (p = 0.1), respectively, for CTA vs. standard care
- Change in angina frequency at 6 months: 18.3 vs. 19.2 (p = 0.02), respectively, for CTA vs. standard care
- Change in treatment satisfaction at 6 months: -5.0 vs. -4.3 (p = 0.1), respectively, for CTA vs. standard care
- Change in quality of life at 6 months: 15.5 vs. 18.6 (p < 0.0001), respectively, for CTA vs. standard care
Among low- to intermediate-risk patients with chest pain, coronary CTA increased the certainty of the diagnosis of angina due to CHD. This definition of angina considered a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ diagnosis, compared with a ‘probable’ or ‘unlikely’ diagnosis. This definition is more patient-centric by definitely ruling in or ruling out disease.
On the other hand, coronary CTA appeared to reduce the frequency of the diagnosis of angina due to CHD. This definition of angina considered a ‘yes’ or ‘probable’ diagnosis, compared with an ‘unlikely’ or ‘no’ diagnosis. This definition is more physician-centric by increasing diagnosis sensitivity, which gives an enhanced opportunity to treat the underlying disease. Coronary CTA was associated with smaller improvements in angina symptoms and quality of life compared with standard care.
Coronary CTA compared with standard care was associated with a nonsignificant increase in coronary revascularization procedures and a nonsignificant reduction in CHD death or MI. This trial was powered for diagnosis for angina, not clinical outcomes; however, SCOT-HEART (and PROMISE) shows that coronary CTA is an alternative to standard care (including conventional stress testing) in the evaluation of patients with chest pain.
Williams MC, Hunter A, Shah A, et al., on behalf of the Scottish COmputed Tomography of the HEART (SCOT-HEART) Trial Investigators. Symptoms and quality of life in patients with suspected angina undergoing CT coronary angiography: a randomised controlled trial. Heart 2017;Feb 28:[Epub ahead of print].
The SCOT-HEART Investigators. CT coronary angiography in patients with suspected angina due to coronary heart disease (SCOT-HEART): an open-label, parallel-group, multicentre trial. Lancet 2015;385:2383-91.
Editorial Comment: Douglas PS. The theory and practice of imaging outcomes research. Lancet 2015;385:2334-5.
Presented by Dr. David E. Newby at ACC.15, San Diego, CA, March 15, 2015.
< Back to Listings