Evidence Hub

Age and Computed Tomography and Invasive Coronary Angiography in Stable Chest Pain: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the DISCHARGE Randomized Clinical Trial

Maria Bosserdt, L. Serna-Higuita, G. Feuchtner, B. Merkely, K. Kofoed, T. Benedek, P. Donnelly, J. Rodríguez-Palomares et al.

JAMA cardiology, 2024

3,561 participants · 11 citations

Abstract

Importance

The effectiveness and safety of computed tomography (CT) and invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in different age groups is unknown.

Objective

To determine the association of age with outcomes of CT and ICA in patients with stable chest pain.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The assessor-blinded Diagnostic Imaging Strategies for Patients With Stable Chest Pain and Intermediate Risk of Coronary Artery Disease (DISCHARGE) randomized clinical trial was conducted between October 2015 and April 2019 in 26 European centers. Patients referred for ICA with stable chest pain and an intermediate probability of obstructive coronary artery disease were analyzed in an intention-to-treat analysis. Data were analyzed from July 2022 to January 2023.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned to a CT-first strategy or a direct-to-ICA strategy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

MACE (ie, cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke) and major procedure-related complications. The primary prespecified outcome of this secondary analysis of age was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at a median follow-up of 3.5 years.

Results

Among 3561 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.1 [10.1] years; 2002 female [56.2%]), 2360 (66.3%) were younger than 65 years, 982 (27.6%) were between ages 65 to 75 years, and 219 (6.1%) were older than 75 years. The primary outcome was MACE at a median (IQR) follow-up of 3.5 (2.9-4.2) years for 3523 patients (99%). Modeling age as a continuous…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 3,561 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free