CHALLENGES OF DIAGNOSIS OF OBSTRUCTIVE CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE: THE ROLE OF NON-INVASIVE TESTING
https://doi.org/10.17802/2306-1278-2019-8-1-70-79
Abstract
High mortality from cardiovascular diseases, especially coronary artery disease (CAD), represents a major economic burden on healthcare systems. The number of diagnostic coronary angiographies (CAG) is increasing in the Russian Federation. However, routine invasive CAG is not able to determine obstructive coronary artery disease in a considerable number of patients. The rate of intact coronary arteries reaches 42% in the major registries and accounts for 37.9% in our Research Institute. Despite all improvements in the diagnostic algorithms focused on suspected coronary artery disease, stated in the recent international and national guidelines, and the availability of advanced non-invasive diagnostic methods, they do not improve accurate CAG diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease. Moreover, the available guidelines contain many contradictions. Therefore, an optimal diagnostic algorithm of significant coronary artery lesions is a subject of discussion. The proposed review discusses all discrepancies concerning the assessment of the pretest probability as well as the proposed non-invasive testing. In addition, the preferred use of non-invasive tests with anatomical assessment (i.e. multispiral computed tomography coronary imaging) rather than functional tests with visualization is stated. This review ensures better understanding of diagnostic strategies for stable coronary artery disease used both in researches and in clinical practice.
About the Authors
E. V. Korok
Federal State Budgetary Institution “Research Institute for Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Disease”
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
PhD, researcher at the Laboratory of Blood Circulation Pathology, Department of Multivessel and Polyvascular Disease,
6, Sosnoviy Blvd., Kemerovo, 650002
A. N. Sumin
Federal State Budgetary Institution “Research Institute for Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Disease”
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
PhD, Head of the Department of Multivessel and Polyvascular Disease,
6, Sosnoviy Blvd., Kemerovo, 650002
References
1. Fihn S.D., Gardin J.M., Abrams J., Berra K., Blankenship J.C., Dallas A.P. et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/ SCAI/STS Guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60: e44–e164. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.07.013.
2. Task Force Members; Montalescot G., Sechtem U., Achenbach S., Andreotti F., Arden C., Budaj A. et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: The Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2013;34:2949–3003. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht296.
3. Gaisenok O.V., Martsevich S.Yu. Determination of Indications for Coronary Angiography in Asymptomatic Patients and Patients With Stable Angina. Kardiologiya. 2014;10:57-62. (In Russian)
4. Korok E.V., Sumin A.N., Sinkov M.A. , Nagirnyak O.A., Chichkova T. Yu., Barbarash L.S. The prevalence of intact coronary arteries in relation with indications for scheduled coronary arteriography. Russ J Cardiol 2016; 2: 52-59. (In Russian). DOI: 10.15829/1560-4071-2016-2-52-59
5. Patel M.R., Peterson E.D., Dai D., Brennan J.M., Redberg R.F., Anderson H.V., Brindis R.G., Douglas P.S. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med. 2010; 362(10): 886-95. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0907272.
6. Patel M.R., Dai D., Hernandez A.F., Douglas P.S., Messenger J., Garratt K.N., Maddox T.M., Peterson E.D., Roe M.T. Prevalence and predictors of nonobstructive coronary artery disease identified with coronary angiography in contemporary clinical practice. Am Heart J 2014; 167: 846–852. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2014.03.001.
7. Costa Filho F.F., Chaves Á.J., Ligabó L.T., Santos E.M., Silva D.T., Puzzi M.A., Braga S.L., Abizaid A., Sousa A.G..Efficacy of patient selection for diagnostic coronary angiography in suspected coronary artery disease. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2015; 105(5): 466-71. doi: 10.5935/abc.20150099.
8. Ferreira A.M., Marques H., Tralhão A., Santos M.B., Santos A.R., Cardoso G. et al. Pre-test probability of obstructive coronary stenosis in patients undergoing coronary CT angiography: Comparative performance of the modified diamond-Forrester algorithm versus methods incorporating cardiovascular risk factors. Int J Cardiol. 2016; 222: 346-51. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.07.180.
9. Genders T.S., Steyerberg E.W., Alkadhi H., Leschka S., Desbiolles L., Nieman K. et al. A clinical prediction rule for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: Validation, updating, and extension. Eur Heart J 2011; 32: 1316-1330. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr014.
10. Sumin AN, Korok EV, Barbarash LS. Non-occlusive coronary artery lesions in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: prevalence and verification tools. Ateroskleroz i dislipidemii. 2016; 1: 56-67. Russian.
11. Smeeth L., Skinner J.S., Ashcroft J., Hemingway H., Timmis A.; Chest Pain Guideline Development Group. NICE clinical guideline: chest pain of recent onset. Br J Gen Pract. 2010; 60(577): 607-10. doi: 10.3399/bjgp10X515124.
12. Sharaf B., Wood T., Shaw L., Johnson B.D., Kelsey S., Anderson R.D., Pepine C.J., Bairey Merz C.N. Adverse outcomes among women presenting with signs and symptoms of ischemia and no obstructive coronary artery disease: findings from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute sponsored Women’s Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE) angiographic core laboratory. Am Heart J. 2013;166:134–141. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.04.002.
13. Neglia D., Rovai D., Caselli C., Pietila M., Teresinska A., Aguadé-Bruix S .et al.; EVINCI Study Investigators. Detection of significant coronary artery disease by non-invasive anatomical and functional imaging. Circ Cardiovas Imaging. 2015;8:e002179. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.114.002179.
14. Arakelyan VS, Bortnikova NV, Papitashvili VG. Impact of cardiac risk factors on treatment strategy for patients with coronary artery disease and aortoiliac lesions. Kompleksnye problemy serdechno-sosudistyh zabolevanij. 2013;4:77-82. (In Russian).
15. Barbarash LS, Sumin AN, Barbarash OL, Ivanov SV. Pre-operative cardiac risk assessment and perioperative cardiac management in non-cardiac surgery. Kardiologiya. 2012;5:77- 87. (In Russian).
16. Ivanov S.V., Sumin A.N., Kazachek Y.V., Philipiev D.E., Gusev S.M., Malyshenko E.S., Barbarash L.S. Options for revascularization outcomes optimization in patients with polyvascular disease. Kompleksnye problemy serdechno-sosudistyh zabolevanij. 2013;3:26-35. (In Russian). DOI:10.17802/2306-1278-2013-3-26-35
17. Sechtem U., Mahrholdt H., Ong P., Athanasiadis A., Schäufele T. Testing in patients with stable coronary artery disease - The debate continues. Circ J. 2016;80(4):802-10. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-16-0220.
18. Sumin A.N. The assessment of pretest probability in obstructive coronary lesion diagnostics: unresolved issuesю Russ J Cardiol 2017, 11 (151): 68–76 (In Russian) DOI: 10.15829/1560-4071-2017-11-68-76
19. Gueret P., Deux J.F., Bonello L., Sarran A., Tron C., Christiaens L. et al. Diagnostic performance of computed tomography coronary angiography (from the Prospective National Multicenter Multivendor EVASCAN Study). Am J Cardiol 2013; 111: 471-478. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.10.029.
20. Moss A.J., Williams M.C., Newby D.E., Nicol E.D. The Updated NICE Guidelines: Cardiac CTas the First-Line Test for Coronary Artery Disease. Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep. 2017;10:15. DOI 10.1007/s12410-017-9412-6.
21. Korok E.V., Sumin A.N. Current issues of CHD diagnosis in materials of the Russian cardiology congress (Ekaterinburg, 20-23 September 2016). Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases. 2017;6(1):131-140. (In Russian) DOI:10.17802/2306-1278-2017-1-131-140
22. Mudrick D.W., Cowper P.A., Shah B.R., Patel M.R., Jensen N.C., Peterson E.D., Douglas P.S. Downstream procedures and outcomes after stress testing for chest pain without known coronary artery disease in the United States. Am Heart J 2012; 163(3):454-461. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.11.022.
23. Rio P., Ramos R., Pereira-da-Silva T., Barbosa C., Cacela D., Fiarresga A. et al. Yield of contemporary clinical strategies to detect patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. Heart Int. 2016; 10(1): e12-9. doi: 10.5301/heartint.5000224.
24. Greenwood J.P., Motwani M., Maredia N., Brown J.M., Everett C.C., Nixon J., Bijsterveld P., Dickinson C.J., Ball S.G., Plein S. Comparison of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography in women with suspected coronary artery disease from the Clinical Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Coronary Heart Disease (CE-MARC) Trial. Circulation. 2014;129(10):1129-38. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.000071.
25. Sergienko V.B. Modern possibilities of radionuclide molecular imaging of atherosclerosis. Ateroskleroz i dislipidemii. 2016;4(25):5-13. (In Russian)
26. Yuan J.W., Wang Y.T., Lu C.Z. Coronary arteriography in the diagnosis results and prognosis analysis of suspected coronary artery disease in patients with normal SPET myocardial perfusion imaging. Hell J Nucl Med. 2015;18(3):215-21.
27. Sumin A.N., Korok E.V., Korotkevich A.A., Kachurina E.N., Kokov A.N., Barbarash O.L. Single photon emission computed tomography in diagnostics of obstructive lesion in coronary arteries. Russ J Cardiol 2017, 12 (152): 14–20 (In Russ) DOI: 10.15829/1560-4071-2017-12-14-20
28. Kuznetsov V.A., Yaroslavskaya E.I., Gorbatenko E.A. Predictors of hemodynamically significant coronary stenoses in patients with disturbed myocardial perfusion based on the results of single-photon emission computed tomography. Klinicheskaya medicina. 2012;7:25-30. (In Russ)
29. Nakanishi R., Gransar H., Slomka P., Arsanjani R., Shalev A., Otaki Y. et al. Predictors of high-risk coronary artery disease in subjects with normal SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016;23(3):530-41. doi: 10.1007/s12350-015-0150-3
30. Miller J.M., Rochitte C.E., Dewey M., Arbab-Zadeh A., Niinuma H., Gottlieb I. et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 2324-2336. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0806576
31. Meijboom W.B., Meijs M.F., Schuijf J.D., Cramer M.J., Mollet N.R., van Mieghem C.A. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: A prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52: 2135-2144. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.08.058.
32. Shaw L.J., Hausleiter J., Achenbach S., Al-Mallah M., Berman D.S., Budoff M.J. et al.; CONFIRM Registry Investigators. Coronary computed tomographic angiography as a gatekeeper to invasive diagnostic and surgical procedures: results from the multicenter CONFIRM (Coronary CT
Review
For citations:
Korok E.V., Sumin A.N. CHALLENGES OF DIAGNOSIS OF OBSTRUCTIVE CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE: THE ROLE OF NON-INVASIVE TESTING. Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases. 2019;8(1):70-79. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17802/2306-1278-2019-8-1-70-79
Views:
791
