Rationale and design of the Clinical Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Coronary heart disease 2 trial (CE-MARC 2): a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial of diagnostic strategies in suspected coronary heart disease

David P Ripley, Julia M Brown, Colin C Everett, Petra Bijsterveld, Simon Walker, Mark Sculpher, Gerry P McCann, Colin Berry, Sven Plein, John P Greenwood, David P Ripley, Julia M Brown, Colin C Everett, Petra Bijsterveld, Simon Walker, Mark Sculpher, Gerry P McCann, Colin Berry, Sven Plein, John P Greenwood

Abstract

Background: A number of investigative strategies exist for the diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CHD). Despite the widespread availability of noninvasive imaging, invasive angiography is commonly used early in the diagnostic pathway. Consequently, approximately 60% of angiograms reveal no evidence of obstructive coronary disease. Reducing unnecessary angiography has potential financial savings and avoids exposing the patient to unnecessary risk. There are no large-scale comparative effectiveness trials of the different diagnostic strategies recommended in international guidelines and none that have evaluated the safety and efficacy of cardiovascular magnetic resonance.

Trial design: CE-MARC 2 is a prospective, multicenter, 3-arm parallel group, randomized controlled trial of patients with suspected CHD (pretest likelihood 10%-90%) requiring further investigation. A total of 1,200 patients will be randomized on a 2:2:1 basis to receive 3.0-T cardiovascular magnetic resonance-guided care, single-photon emission computed tomography-guided care (according to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association appropriate-use criteria), or National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines-based management. The primary (efficacy) end point is the occurrence of unnecessary angiography as defined by a normal (>0.8) invasive fractional flow reserve. Safety of each strategy will be assessed by 3-year major adverse cardiovascular event rates. Cost-effectiveness and health-related quality-of-life measures will be performed.

Conclusions: The CE-MARC 2 trial will provide comparative efficacy and safety evidence for 3 different strategies of investigating patients with suspected CHD, with the intension of reducing unnecessary invasive angiography rates. Evaluation of these management strategies has the potential to improve patient care, health-related quality of life, and the cost-effectiveness of CHD investigation.

Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CE-MARC 2 recruitment process. *PTL as defined by NICE (CG95) guidelines.
Figure 2
Figure 2
CE-MARC 2 study flow diagram.

References

    1. Greenwood J.P., Maredia N., Younger J.F. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography for diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CE-MARC): a prospective trial. Lancet. 2012;379:453–460.
    1. Fihn S.D., Gardin J.M., Abrams J. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease. Circulation. 2012;126:e354–e471.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; London: 2010. Assessment and diagnosis of recent onset chest pain or discomfort of suspected cardiac origin (CG95)
    1. Montalescot G., Sechtem U., Achenbach S. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease. EHJ. 2013;34:2949–3003.
    1. Hannan E.L., Samadashvili Z., Cozzens K. Appropriateness of diagnostic catheterization for suspected coronary artery disease in New York State. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:19–27.
    1. Patel M.R., Dai D., Hernandez A.F. Prevalence and predictors of nonobstructive coronary artery disease identified with coronary angiography in contemporary clinical practice. AHJ. 2014;167:846–852.e2.
    1. Shiralkar S., Rennie A., Snow M. Doctors' knowledge of radiation exposure: questionnaire study. BMJ. 2003;327:371–372.
    1. Razavi R., Hill D.L., Keevil S.F. Cardiac catheterisation guided by MRI in children and adults with congenital heart disease. Lancet. 2003;362:1877–1882.
    1. Fox K.A., McLean S. Nice guidance on the investigation of chest pain. Heart. 2010;96:903–906.
    1. Sharples L., Hughes V., Crean A. Cost-effectiveness of functional cardiac testing in the diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease: a randomised controlled trial. The CECaT trial. Health Technol Assess. 2007;11:iii–iv. [ix-115]
    1. Hendel R.C., Berman D.S., Di Carli M.F. ACCF/ASNC/ACR/AHA/ASE/SCCT/SCMR/SNM 2009 appropriate use criteria for cardiac radionuclide imaging. Circulation. 2009;119:e561–e587.
    1. Diamond G.A., Staniloff H.M., Forrester J.S. Computer-assisted diagnosis in the noninvasive evaluation of patients with suspected coronary artery disease. JACC. 1983;1:444–455.
    1. Pryor D.B., Shaw L., McCants C.B. Value of the history and physical in identifying patients at increased risk for coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118:81–90.
    1. Kramer C.M., Barkhausen J., Flamm S.D. Standardized cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) protocols, society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance: board of trustees task force on standardized protocols. JCMR. 2008;10:35.
    1. Messroghli D.R., Bainbridge G.J., Alfakih K. Assessment of regional left ventricular function: accuracy and reproducibility of positioning standard short-axis sections in cardiac MR imaging. Radiology. 2005;235:229–236.
    1. Anagnostopoulos C., Harbinson M., Kelion A. Procedure guidelines for radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging. Heart. 2004;90(Suppl. 1):i1–i10.
    1. Hesse B., Lindhardt T.B., Acampa W. EANM/ESC guidelines for radionuclide imaging of cardiac function. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:851–885.
    1. Holly T.A., Abbott B.G., Al-Mallah M. Single photon-emission computed tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:941–973.
    1. Abbara S., Arbab-Zadeh A., Callister T.Q. SCCT guidelines for performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography. JCCT. 2009;3:190–204.
    1. Koo B.K., Yang H.M., Doh J.H. Optimal intravascular ultrasound criteria and their accuracy for defining the functional significance of intermediate coronary stenoses of different locations. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:803–811.
    1. Hundley W.G., Bluemke D., Bogaert J.G. Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance guidelines for reporting cardiovascular magnetic resonance examinations. JCMR. 2009;11:5.
    1. Thygesen K., Alpert J.S., Jaffe A.S. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2012;126:2020–2035.
    1. Walker S., Girardin F., McKenna C. Cost-effectiveness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of coronary heart disease: an economic evaluation using data from the CE-MARC study. Heart. 2013;99:873–881.
    1. Fleiss J.L., Tytun A., Ury H.K. A simple approximation for calculating sample sizes for comparing independent proportions. Biometrics. 1980;36:343–346.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel