Screening Of CoRonary ArTEry diSease

Overview

This study is a randomized trial with the objective of comparing the cost-effectiveness of the 2 recommended strategies: CCTA vs functional tests, allowing the evaluation of the quality of life of these patients in relation to the health resources used. In symptomatic patients with an intermediate probability of having stable CAD, i.e., whose pretest or clinical probability does not allow the elimination of the disease, and in patients without anginal symptoms for low levels of exercise who do not respond to medical therapy, in France, the diagnostic care pathways have become mature enough to set up a pragmatic prospective randomized trial with the objective of comparing the cost-effectiveness of the 2 recommended strategies: CCTA vs. Probabilistic medico-economic reasoning makes it possible to establish this two-way hypothesis more easily than in clinical research without the need to impose the superiority of one of the strategies.

In Europe, cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death with 4 million deaths per year, of which 1.8 million are due to coronary heart disease (CHD). CAD also has a cost with 46 billion / year spent for its management. In France, 4 billion are spent on it, which shows that it remains a public health problem and that most of the premature events are avoidable, in particular by screening patients with symptoms that make them suspect it. In these symptomatic patients suspected of having CAD, screening is carried out in particular through the use of imaging with technological innovations and performances that are constantly being improved and validated in large randomized trials. The PROMISE trial randomized an impressive number of 10003 patients comparing coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and functional testing to assess suspected CAD, which showed similar efficacy of the 2 strategies in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 2 years: 3.3% for CCTA and 3% for functional testing. Thus, the 2019 European guidelines allow CCTA or functional testing as the initial test to diagnose CAD in symptomatic patients. Thus, clinicians now have 2 first-line strategies: CCTA or functional tests (myocardial scintigraphy, echocardiography, MRI). The clinician can choose to initiate management with an anatomic evaluation of the coronary arteries (CCTA) or a search for ischemia (functional test). These two ways of assessing CAD are very different and are the subject of debate in Europe. For example, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom now recommends CCTA as the first test, unlike in Europe. In view of all these arguments, it is relevant to propose a randomized trial with the objective of comparing the cost-effectiveness of the 2 recommended strategies: CCTA vs. functional tests, making it possible to evaluate the quality of life of these patients in relation to the health resources used. In symptomatic patients with an intermediate probability of having stable CAD, i.e., whose pretest or clinical probability does not allow the elimination of the disease, and in patients without anginal symptoms for low levels of exercise who do not respond to medical therapy, in France, the diagnostic care pathways have become mature enough to set up a pragmatic prospective randomized trial with the objective of comparing the cost-effectiveness of the 2 recommended strategies: CCTA vs. Probabilistic medico-economic reasoning makes it possible to establish this two-way hypothesis more easily than in clinical research without the need to impose the superiority of one of the strategies.