The prognostic role of stress echocardiography in a contemporary population and the clinical significance of limited apical ischaemia

Comparison of NICE and ESC proposed strategies on new onset chest pain and the contemporary clinical utility of pretest probability risk score

AIMS

Patients with de novo chest pain are usually investigated non-invasively. The new UK-National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommend CT coronary angiography (CTCA) for all patients, while European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends functional tests. We sought to compare the clinical utility and perform a cost analysis of these recommendations in two UK centres with different primary investigative strategies.

METHODSRESULTS

We compared two groups of patients, group A (n=667) and group B (n=654), with new onset chest pain in two neighbouring National Health Service hospitals, each primarily following either ESC (group A) or NICE (group B) guidance. We assessed the clinical utility of each strategy, including progression to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and revascularisation. We present a retrospective cost analysis in the context of UK tariff for stress echo (£176), CTCA (£220) and ICA (£1001). Finally, we sought to identify predictors of revascularisation in the whole population.Baseline characteristics in both groups were similar. The progression to ICA was comparable (9.9% vs 12.0%, p=0.377), with similar requirement for revascularisation (4.0% vs 5.0%.; p=0.532). The average cost of investigations per investigated patient was lower in group A (£279.66 vs £325.77), saving £46.11 per patient. The ESC recommended risk score (RS) was found to be the only predictor of revascularisation (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both NICE and ESC-proposed strategies led to similar rates of ICA and need for revascularisation in discrete, but similar groups of patients. The SE-first approach had a lower overall cost by £46.11 per patient, and the ESC RS was the only variable correlated to revascularisation.

Does stress echocardiography still have a role in the rapid access chest pain clinic post NICE CG95?

Introduction

The 2016 NICE clinical guideline 95 (CG95) demoted functional imaging to a second-line test following computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA). Many cardiac CT services in the UK require substantial investment and growth to implement this. Chest pain services like ours are likely to continue to use stress testing for the foreseeable future. We share service evaluation data from our department to show that a negative stress echocardiogram can continue to be used for chest pain assessment.

Methods

1815 patients were referred to rapid access chest pain clinic (RACPC) between June 2013 and March 2015. 802 patients had stress echocardiography as the initial investigation. 446 patients had normal resting left ventricular (LV) systolic function and a negative stress echocardiogram. At least 24 months after discharge, a survey was carried out to detect major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, admission to hospital for heart failure or angina, coronary artery disease at angiography, revascularisation by angioplasty or coronary artery bypass grafting) within 2 years.

Results

Overall, 351 patients were successfully followed up. The mean Diamond-Forrester (D-F) score and QRISK2 suggested a high pre-test probability (PTP) of coronary artery disease (CAD). There were nine deaths (eight non-cardiac deaths and one cardiac death). MACE occurred in four patients with a mean time of 17.5 months (11.6–23.7 months). The annual event rate was 0.6%.

Conclusion

A negative stress echocardiogram can reliably reassure patients and clinicians even in high PTP populations with suspected stable angina. It can continue to be used to assess stable chest pain post CG95.

CT coronary angiography: a paradigm shift for functional imaging tests

The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) have just updated their guideline on new-onset stable chest pain, recommending that all patients should be investigated with a CT coronary angiography (CTCA). In a separate guideline, NICE recommended CT fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR), to assess coronary stenoses, found on CTCA, stating that this would reduce the need for invasive coronary angiography and hence reduce cost. We discuss the evidence base for CT-FFR and emphasise that we already have established functional imaging tests, with extensive evidence base for efficacy and prognosis and that CT-FFR should be compared with this standard of care and not with the much more expensive and invasive fractional flow reserve undertaken during invasive coronary angiography.

The safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of stress echocardiography in patients with high pretest probability of coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stress echocardiography (SE), as well as the place of SE in patients with high pretest probability (PTP) of coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

We investigated 257 patients with no history of CAD, who underwent SE, and they had a PTP risk score >61% (high PTP). According to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance (NICE CG95, 2010), these patients should be investigated directly with an invasive coronary angiogram (ICA). We investigated those patients with SE initially and then with ICA when appropriate. Follow-up data with regard to Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Events (MACCE, defined as cardiovascular mortality, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), myocardial infarction (MI) and late revascularisation for acute coronary syndrome/unstable angina) were recorded for a period of 12 months following the SE. The tariff for SE and ICA is £300 and £1400, respectively.

RESULTS

106 patients had a positive SE (41.2%) and 61 of them (57.5%) had further investigation with ICA. 15 (24.6%) of these patients were revascularised. The average cost per patient for investigations was £654.09. If NICE guidance had been followed, the cost would have been significantly higher at £1400 (p<0.001). Overall, 5 MACCE (2.0%) were recorded; 4 (3.8%) in the group of positive SE (2 CVAs and 2 MIs) and 1 (0.7%) in the group of negative SE (1 CVA). There was no MI and no need for revascularisation in the negative SE group.

CONCLUSION

Our approach to investigate patients who present with de novo chest pain and high PTP, with SE initially and subsequently with ICA when appropriate, reduces the cost significantly (£745.91 per patient) with a very low rate of MACCE. However, this study is underpowered to assess safety of SE.