- Email: [email protected]
Rhinotillexis: A Possible Heuristic to Reduce Inappropriate Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging?
Journal of the American College of Cardiology © 2012 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Published by Elsevier Inc.
Vol. 60, No. 5, 2012 ISSN 0735-1097/$36.00
CORRESPONDENCE
Letters to the Editor
Rhinotillexis: A Possible Heuristic to Reduce Inappropriate Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging? Hachamovitch et al. (1) presented findings from the prospectively acquired SPARC (Study of Myocardial Perfusion and Coronary Anatomy Imaging Roles in Coronary Artery Disease [CAD]) registry. Enrolled patients had intermediate to high likelihood of CAD and were referred for “clinically indicated” noninvasive cardiac imaging tests. The authors reported data on medication changes as well as referrals for both cardiac catheterization and revascularization at 90 days, based on results of these imaging tests. One of the main findings was a concerning lack of medical therapy optimization and cardiac catheterization referrals in those found to have moderately to severely abnormal findings on initial imaging (1). This is particularly concerning because 80% of the SPARC registry patients had “anginal symptoms” at enrollment (1). One presumes that the majority of these had stable angina; however, it would be helpful if the authors could report what proportion had unstable angina (recognizing that chest pain at rest was one study exclusion criterion [2]). The authors reported that 24% of patients with moderately to severely abnormal findings were not receiving aspirin, 44% were not receiving beta-blockade, and 23% were not receiving lipidlowering agents at 90 days. These suboptimal results were accentuated by the use of patient self-report for medication changes (frequently overestimated [3]) and the relatively short duration of follow-up. A number of studies have demonstrated a decline in ongoing medication compliance months after initial imaging results induced medication changes (4). We previously published similar results from a large matched-cohort study evaluating the impact of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) findings on secondary test referrals and medication use in a lower-risk cohort (3). We found that our 90-day adjusted odds ratios for aspirin use (6.8) and statin use (4.6) in those with abnormal CCTA (compared with controls) were much reduced at 18 months (4.2 for aspirin and 3.3 for statins). The original SPARC protocol also included assessment of medication use at 1 and 2 years’ follow-up (2). We wonder whether the authors can report their medication use findings over longer follow-up. Similarly, half of those with moderate to severe abnormalities were not referred for cardiac catheterization. The authors posited that the low number of catheterization referrals may have been due to equipoise. Certainly, the widely disseminated results of the COURAGE (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation) trial support this theory (5). That said, the SPARC study definition of a moderate to severe abnormality on CCTA was “ⱖ50% left main stenosis, ⱖ70% stenosis in the proximal left anterior descending artery, or 3-vessel CAD with ⱖ70% stenosis.” With such high-grade CAD, it is disconcerting
that 40% of these symptomatic CCTA patients did not undergo catheterization. Thus, many patients are presumably being sent for wasteful imaging tests because even markedly abnormal results do not influence the referring physicians’ management. This brings to mind a common medical heuristic from our hospital regarding public displays of rhinotillexis, “you better have a plan if you find something in there.” Physicians would do well to remember this when ordering such cardiac imaging tests. *John W. McEvoy, MB Michael J. Blaha, MD, MPH Roger S. Blumenthal, MD *Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease Johns Hopkins Hospital 600 North Wolfe Street Carnegie 568B Baltimore, Maryland 21287 E-mail: [email protected] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.02.069 REFERENCES
1. Hachamovitch R, Nutter B, Hlatky MA, et al. Patient management after noninvasive cardiac imaging results from SPARC (Study of Myocardial Perfusion and Coronary Anatomy Imaging Roles in Coronary Artery Disease). J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:462–74. 2. Hachamovitch R, Johnson JR, Hlatky MA, et al. The Study of Myocardial Perfusion and Coronary Anatomy Imaging Roles in CAD (SPARC): design, rationale, and baseline patient characteristics of a prospective, multicenter observational registry comparing PET, SPECT, and CTA for resource utilization and clinical outcomes. J Nucl Cardiol 2009;16:935– 48. 3. McEvoy JW, Blaha MJ, Nasir K, et al. Impact of coronary computed tomographic angiography results on patient and physician behavior in a low-risk population. Arch Intern Med 2011;171:1260 – 8. 4. Nasir K, McClelland RL, Blumenthal RS, et al. Coronary artery calcium in relation to initiation and continuation of cardiovascular preventive medications: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2010;3:228 –35. 5. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1503–16.
CTCA Versus MPI ⫽ Anatomical Versus Functional Hachamovitch et al. (1) reported increased referral rates for coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate to high probability of coronary artery disease following coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) as compared with myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). Several hypotheses for this discrepancy were offered. Although these may well be correct, the fact remains
Vol. 60, No. 5, 2012 ISSN 0735-1097/$36.00
CORRESPONDENCE
Letters to the Editor
Rhinotillexis: A Possible Heuristic to Reduce Inappropriate Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging? Hachamovitch et al. (1) presented findings from the prospectively acquired SPARC (Study of Myocardial Perfusion and Coronary Anatomy Imaging Roles in Coronary Artery Disease [CAD]) registry. Enrolled patients had intermediate to high likelihood of CAD and were referred for “clinically indicated” noninvasive cardiac imaging tests. The authors reported data on medication changes as well as referrals for both cardiac catheterization and revascularization at 90 days, based on results of these imaging tests. One of the main findings was a concerning lack of medical therapy optimization and cardiac catheterization referrals in those found to have moderately to severely abnormal findings on initial imaging (1). This is particularly concerning because 80% of the SPARC registry patients had “anginal symptoms” at enrollment (1). One presumes that the majority of these had stable angina; however, it would be helpful if the authors could report what proportion had unstable angina (recognizing that chest pain at rest was one study exclusion criterion [2]). The authors reported that 24% of patients with moderately to severely abnormal findings were not receiving aspirin, 44% were not receiving beta-blockade, and 23% were not receiving lipidlowering agents at 90 days. These suboptimal results were accentuated by the use of patient self-report for medication changes (frequently overestimated [3]) and the relatively short duration of follow-up. A number of studies have demonstrated a decline in ongoing medication compliance months after initial imaging results induced medication changes (4). We previously published similar results from a large matched-cohort study evaluating the impact of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) findings on secondary test referrals and medication use in a lower-risk cohort (3). We found that our 90-day adjusted odds ratios for aspirin use (6.8) and statin use (4.6) in those with abnormal CCTA (compared with controls) were much reduced at 18 months (4.2 for aspirin and 3.3 for statins). The original SPARC protocol also included assessment of medication use at 1 and 2 years’ follow-up (2). We wonder whether the authors can report their medication use findings over longer follow-up. Similarly, half of those with moderate to severe abnormalities were not referred for cardiac catheterization. The authors posited that the low number of catheterization referrals may have been due to equipoise. Certainly, the widely disseminated results of the COURAGE (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation) trial support this theory (5). That said, the SPARC study definition of a moderate to severe abnormality on CCTA was “ⱖ50% left main stenosis, ⱖ70% stenosis in the proximal left anterior descending artery, or 3-vessel CAD with ⱖ70% stenosis.” With such high-grade CAD, it is disconcerting
that 40% of these symptomatic CCTA patients did not undergo catheterization. Thus, many patients are presumably being sent for wasteful imaging tests because even markedly abnormal results do not influence the referring physicians’ management. This brings to mind a common medical heuristic from our hospital regarding public displays of rhinotillexis, “you better have a plan if you find something in there.” Physicians would do well to remember this when ordering such cardiac imaging tests. *John W. McEvoy, MB Michael J. Blaha, MD, MPH Roger S. Blumenthal, MD *Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease Johns Hopkins Hospital 600 North Wolfe Street Carnegie 568B Baltimore, Maryland 21287 E-mail: [email protected] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.02.069 REFERENCES
1. Hachamovitch R, Nutter B, Hlatky MA, et al. Patient management after noninvasive cardiac imaging results from SPARC (Study of Myocardial Perfusion and Coronary Anatomy Imaging Roles in Coronary Artery Disease). J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:462–74. 2. Hachamovitch R, Johnson JR, Hlatky MA, et al. The Study of Myocardial Perfusion and Coronary Anatomy Imaging Roles in CAD (SPARC): design, rationale, and baseline patient characteristics of a prospective, multicenter observational registry comparing PET, SPECT, and CTA for resource utilization and clinical outcomes. J Nucl Cardiol 2009;16:935– 48. 3. McEvoy JW, Blaha MJ, Nasir K, et al. Impact of coronary computed tomographic angiography results on patient and physician behavior in a low-risk population. Arch Intern Med 2011;171:1260 – 8. 4. Nasir K, McClelland RL, Blumenthal RS, et al. Coronary artery calcium in relation to initiation and continuation of cardiovascular preventive medications: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2010;3:228 –35. 5. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1503–16.
CTCA Versus MPI ⫽ Anatomical Versus Functional Hachamovitch et al. (1) reported increased referral rates for coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate to high probability of coronary artery disease following coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) as compared with myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). Several hypotheses for this discrepancy were offered. Although these may well be correct, the fact remains