Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2024 May-Jun;18(3):291-296.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2024.03.004. Epub 2024 Mar 11.

The effect of CTCA guided selective invasive graft assessment on coronary angiographic parameters and outcomes: Insights from the BYPASS-CTCA trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

The effect of CTCA guided selective invasive graft assessment on coronary angiographic parameters and outcomes: Insights from the BYPASS-CTCA trial

Matthew Kelham et al. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2024 May-Jun.

Abstract

Background: Computed tomography cardiac angiography (CTCA) is recommended for the evaluation of patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. The BYPASS-CTCA study demonstrated that CTCA prior to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in CABG patients leads to significant reductions in procedure time and contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN), alongside improved patient satisfaction. However, whether CTCA information was used to facilitate selective graft cannulation at ICA was not protocol mandated. In this post-hoc analysis we investigated the influence of CTCA facilitated selective graft assessment on angiographic parameters and study endpoints.

Methods: BYPASS-CTCA was a randomized controlled trial in which patients with previous CABG referred for ICA were randomized to undergo CTCA prior to ICA, or ICA alone. In this post-hoc analysis we assessed the impact of selective ICA (grafts not invasively cannulated based on the CTCA result) following CTCA versus non-selective ICA (imaging all grafts irrespective of CTCA findings). The primary endpoints were ICA procedural duration, incidence of CIN, and patient satisfaction post-ICA. Secondary endpoints included the incidence of procedural complications and 1-year major adverse cardiac events.

Results: In the CTCA cohort (n ​= ​343), 214 (62.4%) patients had selective coronary angiography performed, whereas 129 (37.6%) patients had non-selective ICA. Procedure times were significantly reduced in the selective CTCA ​+ ​ICA group compared to the non-selective CTCA ​+ ​ICA group (-5.82min, 95% CI -7.99 to -3.65, p ​< ​0.001) along with reduction of CIN (1.5% vs 5.8%, OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.98). No difference was seen in patient satisfaction with the ICA, however procedural complications (0.9% vs 4.7%, OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.09-0.87) and 1-year major adverse cardiac events (13.1% vs 20.9%, HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.96) were significantly lower in the selective group.

Conclusions: In patients with prior CABG, CTCA guided selective angiographic assessment of bypass grafts is associated with improved procedural parameters, lower complication rates and better 12-month outcomes. Taken in addition to the main findings of the BYPASS-CTCA trial, these results suggest a synergistic approach between CTCA and ICA should be considered in this patient group.

Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03736018.

Keywords: Computed tomography cardiac angiography; Coronary artery bypass grafting; Invasive coronary angiography; Ischaemic heart disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interest FP receives institutional research support from Siemens Healthineers. All other authors have reported no conflicts of interest.

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data