Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
705 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2011-06-30
2011-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
At our institution, we have been performing CTCS in this patient cohort since 2003. We plan to retrospectively review the usefulness in CTCS in patients with different likelihood for significant CAD, particularly in patients with absent calcium and compare with the traditional assessment. We also plan to follow-up these patients for any myocardial infarction and death from any cause.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Background Patients with chest pain (excluding that of sudden onset) are routinely referred by the GPs to the RACPC centres in the hospitals. They are assessed by clinical history including risk factors, cardiovascular exam, resting ECG, chest x-ray, and exercise ECG. At our institution, we have also been performing CTCS in men more than 40 and women more than 50 years of age since 2003. Recent NICE guidance1 recommends that patients with low pre-test probability (10-30%) of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) have a CT calcium scoring scan and if the score is 0, they can be considered to have non-cardiac chest pain. However, there is controversy regarding relationship of absent calcification with significant CAD and its prognostic value.
This study would enable us to compare and determine the value of CTCS in patients with non-acute chest pain in predicting significant CAD and safety of absent coronary artery calcification.
Rationale for Study
1. To determine if CT coronary calcium scoring adds any value to the existing clinical assessment and exercise ECG. This is not well established in patients presenting with non-acute chest pain to the rapid access chest pain clinics.
2. The study would help in determining if absence of calcification on CT can be considered to have low likelihood of significant coronary artery disease and a good cardiovascular outcome over the period of follow-up. Both these issues are currently controversial in the literature in this group of patients.
STUDY OBJECTIVES
Primary Objective To determine the prognostic value of CT coronary calcium scoring in patients with non-acute chest pain for non-fatal MI and death, and compare with traditional assessment including exercise ECG.
Secondary Objectives To determine how CT coronary calcium scoring compare with traditional assessment including exercise ECG in predicting significant coronary artery disease in patients presenting with non-acute chest pain.
METHODOLOGY Design This is a retrospective cross-sectional study involving analysis of patients' clinical, diagnostic, and management data from hospital records and follow-up questionnaires for outcome. The study does not require any new diagnostic, therapeutic, or interventional procedure.
Data of patients who have presented to the chest pain clinic since October 2003 would be collected from hospital records for:
1. Age, sex, type of chest pain, and risk factors. These would be used to calculate the pre-test probability of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) using Duke's score.
2. Results of exercise ECG where performed.
3. Results of CT calcium scoring.
4. Results of other non-invasive investigations such as stress imaging and CT coronary angiography where performed.
5. Results of invasive coronary angiography where performed. Patients with \>70% diameter stenosis or those who underwent percutaneous stent insertion (PCI) or bypass surgery would be considered to have significant CAD.
For those patients who do not undergo any PCI or surgery as a result of above evaluation, we will try to find out if they have subsequently suffered any heart attack or died. This would again be performed through hospital records and if not available, through questionnaires send to the patients and/or their GPs as part of standard clinical care.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
RETROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Stable chest pain
All patients presenting with stable chest pain and referred by their general practitioners to the chest pain clinic in the hospital who had CT calcium scoring performed besides standard assessment.
CT calcium scoring
CT Calcium scoring was performed in the patients as an imaging test in addition to the traditional assessment on the same day of patients attending the chest pain clinic on the first visit. This was performed with standard protocol and the absolute calcium score was calculated.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
CT calcium scoring
CT Calcium scoring was performed in the patients as an imaging test in addition to the traditional assessment on the same day of patients attending the chest pain clinic on the first visit. This was performed with standard protocol and the absolute calcium score was calculated.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* those who underwent CT calcium scoring
* availability of all relevant risk factor information
Exclusion Criteria
40 Years
80 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Harefield Hospital
London, Middlesex, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Skinner JS, Smeeth L, Kendall JM, Adams PC, Timmis A; Chest Pain Guideline Development Group. NICE guidance. Chest pain of recent onset: assessment and diagnosis of recent onset chest pain or discomfort of suspected cardiac origin. Heart. 2010 Jun;96(12):974-8. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2009.190066. No abstract available.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
11/LO/1693
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id