Using coronary calcification to exclude an ischemic etiology for cardiomyopathy: A validation study and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary data suggests the absence of coronary artery calcification (CAC) excludes ischemic etiologies of cardiomyopathy. We prospectively validate and perform a systematic review to determine the utility of an Agatston score=0 to exclude the diagnosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with newly diagnosed LV dysfunction were prospectively enrolled. Patients underwent CAC imaging and were followed until an etiologic diagnosis of cardiomyopathy was made. Eighty-two patients were enrolled in the study and underwent CAC imaging with 81.7% patients having non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. An Agatston score=0 successfully excluded an ischemic etiology for cardiomyopathy with a specificity of 100% (CI: 74.7-100%) and a positive predictive value of 100% (CI: 85.0%-100%). A systematic literature review was performed and studies were deemed suitable for inclusion if: 1) patients with CHF, cardiomyopathy or LV dysfunction were enrolled, 2) underwent CAC imaging and patients were assessed for an Agatston score=0 or the absence of CAC, and 3) the final etiologic diagnosis (ischemic or non-ischemic) was provided. Eight studies provided sufficient information to calculate operating characteristics for an Agatston score=0 and were combined with our validation cohort for a total of 754 patients. An Agatston score=0 excluded ischemic cardiomyopathy with specificity and positive predictive values of 98.4% (CI: 95.6-99.5%), and 98.3% (CI: 95.5-99.5%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cardiomyopathy of unknown etiology, an Agatston score=0 appears to rule out an ischemic etiology. A screening CAC may be a simple and cost-effective method of triaging patients, identifying those who do and do not need additional CAD investigations.

Canceled coronary computed tomography angiography: Downstream testing and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Downstream resource utilization and its impact on outcomes after a canceled CCTA have not been well studied. We sought to understand downstream resource utilization and patient outcomes after canceled CCTA. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled into an institutional cardiac CT registry. Patients who had the CCTA study canceled because of severe coronary calcification were followed for downstream resource utilization and the composite of all-cause mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI). 463 patients had their CCTA canceled due to severe coronary calcification and follow-up was available for 453 (97.8%) patients (median follow-up=36.0months). There were a total of 62 events (41 all-cause deaths and 21 non-fatal MI) with an annualized event rate of 4%. Three hundred and twenty patients underwent downstream CAD (ICA or MPI or EST) investigations. Age, NCEP/ATP III risk, beta-blocker use, Agatston and downstream CAD testing were associated with the primary outcome. There were fewer events in those that received downstream CAD testing (30 (9.7%) versus 32 (22.4%)). The annualized event rates for those who did and did not receive downstream CAD testing were 2.8% and 6.2%, respectively. Multivariable analysis confirmed that downstream CAD testing was an independent predictor of event-free survival and that the absence of additional CAD testing was associated with worse outcome (HR: 2.58 (95% CI: 1.54-4.31)). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with canceled CCTA due to severe and/or extensive CAC have high rates of death and non-fatal MI. The use of additional CAD testing appears to be associated with improved outcomes.

Coronary Artery Disease in French Canadians-Investigation of a Suggested Vulnerable Population.

BACKGROUND: There is a perception among Canadian physicians that coronary artery disease (CAD) and adverse cardiac events are more common in those of French Canadian heritage. We sought to compare the prevalence of CAD using coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) in French Canadians and non-French white Canadians. METHODS: Consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled in our institutional CCTA registry. Of 10,868 CCTA examinations, we analyzed white patients who identified themselves as French Canadian or non-French Canadian. These 2 groups were compared for baseline characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors, and routine markers for CAD on CTCA. Propensity score adjustments were also made to account for differences in demographics. RESULTS: We identified 1683 French Canadians (mean age, 58.5 ± 10.7 years; 54.2% men) and 5077 non-French white Canadians (mean age, 59.4 ± 11.4 years; 57.3% men). French Canadians were more likely to have a smoking history (64.1% vs 56.1%), diabetes (15.6% vs 13.6%), and a family history of premature CAD (53.3% vs 44.6%) (P < 0.05 for all). There was no significant difference in measures of CAD between French Canadians and non-French white Canadians in obstructive CAD (32.5% vs 32.2%; P = 0.997), total plaque score (4.6 ± 4.3 vs 4.5 ± 4.4; P = 0.616) and Agatston score (168.1 ± 319.8 vs 183.6 ± 433.7; P = 0.371). After propensity score adjustment, there was still no significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that French Canadians in the Champlain region have a greater prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors compared with non-French Canadians; however, they do not appear to have a greater prevalence or severity of coronary atherosclerosis as assessed by CCTA.