Systematic review, meta-analysis and economic modelling of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Assessment of diagnostic and prognostic accuracyCTCA died on follow-up. There were 2 out of 43 and 12 out of 185 non-fatal MIs among those patientswith positive or intermediate CTCA in the cohorts of Rubinshtein 135 and Schlett. 136 The cohorts of Miller 134(n = 18), Goldstein 131 (n = 32) and Hollander 133 (n = 54, follow-up to 30 days) reported no cases of deathor non-fatal MIs among those patients with positive CTCA. It could be argued that the process outcomes(PCI and CABG) prevented subsequent death or non-fatal MI in those with positive CTCA, but this isdifficult to determine.In the study of Schlett et al. 136 patients and carers were blind to CTCA findings, so any association betweenCTCA findings and process events (PCI and CABG) was not simply due to physicians acting on CTCAfindings. Schlett et al. found that CTCA predicted MACEs, even after adjustment using a clinical risk scoreincorporating ECG and troponin measurement. Thus, this study provides the best evidence that CTCAprovides independent prognostic value beyond routine clinical assessment.The study of CT CAC scoring 151 reported that 9 out of 91 patients with a CAC score of > 0 had MACEs(two MI and nine PCI), compared with 0 out of 82 with a CAC score = 0.The results of meta-analysis of CTCA prognostic studies are shown in Figure 30 (positive and intermediatevs negative) and Figure 31 (positive vs intermediate and negative). Only studies that definitely reporteddata from patients with positive and negative CTCA are included in this analysis. Meta-analysis of thefive studies with analysable data showed a RR for MACEs of 3.1 (95% CrI 0.3 to 18.7) for positive andintermediate scans compared with negative scan and 5.8 CrI (95% Crl 0.6 to 24.5) for positive scancompared with intermediate or negative scans. These estimates are subject to considerable uncertainty,with the CrI including one (i.e. no association) for both estimates. Taken alongside the limitations relatingto patient selection and process outcomes suggests that there is currently only weak evidence that CTCAprovides prognostically useful information in patients with suspected ACS.Prognostic studies of exercise electrocardiographyTable 29 shows the characteristics of the prognostic studies of exercise ECG. Sample sizes ranged from 28to 1000. The mean age (30–60 years) was relatively young, reflecting the selection of low-risk patients inmany of the cohorts. Follow-up ranged from 30 days to > 12 months. There was no consistency in thedefinitions and reporting of MACEs, with some studies reporting composite outcomes only and othersreporting outcomes separately with no indication of whether or not some patients had suffered multipledifferent adverse outcomes.Table 30 shows the quality assessment of the exercise ECG studies. The population age and sex werealways well described but most studies did not clearly define their inclusion criteria. MACEs were definedin the methods section in all but one study and was defined and identified independent to the index testin all studies. No study undertook multivariate analysis to determine the independent prognostic value ofexercise ECG.Table 31 shows the outcomes of the studies of exercise ECG. Most of the studies reported inconclusiveresults separately from positives and negatives but three studies 142,147,148 reported them with positives, onewith negatives, 139 and it was unclear in one study whether or not there were any inconclusive results. 150Overall, MACE rates varied between the studies, reflecting variation in patient selection criteria and thedefinition of MACEs. Rates were generally low among patients with negative ETT results and there wassome evidence that positive tests identified higher-risk patients. However, higher rates of revascularisationamong patients with positive ETT may reflect physician awareness and expectation of a need forrevascularisation. There was evidence from some studies that death and MI rates were higher amongpatients with positive ETT, although the modest numbers limit the conclusions that may be drawn.The results of meta-analysis of prognostic studies of exercise ECG are shown in Figure 32 (positive andinconclusive vs negative) and Figure 33 (positive vs inconclusive and negative). Meta-analysis showed aRR for MACEs of 8.4 (95% CrI 3.1 to 17.3) for positive and inconclusive compared with negative and74NIHR Journals Library
DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Technology Assessment 2013 Vol. 17 No. 1Study RT NT RC NC RRGoldstein 2007 131 0 32 0 67 1.52 (0.04 to 19.61)Hollander 2009 133 0 54 0 508 2.20 (0.06 to 26.42)Rubinshtein 2007 135 14 43 0 15 5.25 (1.24 to 33.90)Miller 2011 134 0 18 0 10 1.10 (0.04 to 17.74)Schlett 2011 136 25 185 0 183 14.24 (3.98 to 82.68)Overall 3.09 (0.32 to 18.74)FIGURE 30 Meta-analysis of CTCA prognostic studies: positive and intermediate vs negative.Study RT NT RC NC RRGoldstein 2007 131 0 8 0 91 4.32 (0.10 to 32.43)Hollander 2009 133 0 13 0 549 5.24 (0.12 to 45.18)Rubinshtein 2007 135 13 23 1 35 9.18 (3.16 to 33.49)Miller 2011 134 0 18 0 10 2.44 (0.06 to 23.17)Schlett 2011 136 20 68 5 300 13.03 (6.18 to 32.78)Overall 5.80 (0.61 to 24.49)FIGURE 31 Meta-analysis of CTCA prognostic studies: positive vs intermediate and negative.0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.000.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00© Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2013. This work was produced by Goodacre et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of Statefor Health. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journalsprovided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should beaddressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton SciencePark, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK.75
Page 1:
Health Technology AssessmentVOLUME
Page 7:
DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Techno
Page 10 and 11:
ContentsAppendix 5 Expected discoun
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19:
Page 22 and 23:
BackgroundTABLE 1 Hospital admissio
Page 24 and 25:
Background2. investigation of the c
Page 26 and 27:
BackgroundComputed tomographic coro
Page 28 and 29:
Research questionsiii. the diagnost
Page 30 and 31:
Assessment of diagnostic and progno
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45: Assessment of diagnostic and progno
Page 91 and 92: DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Techno
Page 93: DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Techno
Page 125: DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Techno
Page 128 and 129: Discussionspecificity were 62% (95%
Page 130 and 131: Discussionneed for revascularisatio
Page 132 and 133: Discussionchanges in sensitivity an
Page 134 and 135: Discussionuncertainty about these p
Page 136 and 137: Discussiontroponin assays have bett
Page 138 and 139: ConclusionsSuggested research prior
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151:
Page 154 and 155:
Appendix 144. heart-type fatty acid
Page 156 and 157:
Appendix 1135. interleukin 33.mp. (
Page 158 and 159:
Appendix 147. 37 and 45 (529)48. li
Page 161:
Page 164 and 165:
Appendix 313. Fernandez Portales JG
Page 166 and 167:
Appendix 346. Luscher MS, Ravkilde
Page 168 and 169:
Appendix 316. Rao SV, Ohman EM, Gra
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195:
Page 198 and 199:
Appendix 9Clinical diagnosis of NST
Page 200 and 201:
Appendix 9respectively. Exercise EC
Page 202 and 203:
Appendix 93. Two reviewers will mak
Page 204 and 205:
Appendix 9The methodology used in t
Page 206 and 207:
Appendix 9ES (Information Resources
Page 208:
Appendix 923. Westwood ME, Whiting
show all

Systematic review, meta-analysis and economic modelling of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?