Cardiac CT in the Emergency Department: Contrasting Evidence from Registries and Randomized Controlled Trials

Nam Ju Lee, Harold Litt

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

Purpose of Review: To compare outcomes between registries and randomized controlled trials of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA)-based versus standard of care approaches to the initial evaluation of patients with acute chest pain. Recent Findings: Randomized trials have demonstrated CCTA to be a safe and efficient tool for triage of low- to intermediate-risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain. Recent studies demonstrate heterogeneous result using different standard of care approaches for evaluation of hard endpoints in comparison with standard evaluation. Also, there has been continued concern for increase in subsequent testing after coronary CTA. Summary: Although CCTA improves detection of coronary artery disease, it is uncertain if it will bring improvement of long-term health outcomes at this point of time. Careful analysis of the previous results and further investigation will be required to validate evaluation of hard endpoints.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number24
JournalCurrent Cardiology Reports
Volume20
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2018

Keywords

  • Cardiac
  • CCTA
  • Coronary
  • CT
  • Emergency department
  • Standard of care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Cardiac CT in the Emergency Department: Contrasting Evidence from Registries and Randomized Controlled Trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this