ArticleThe British journal of cardiology2024
The prevalence of coronary artery disease in patients presenting with 'non-anginal chest pain'.
Article in The British journal of cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) advise against routine testing for coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with non-anginal chest pain (NACP). This clinical audit sought to establish the prevalence of significant CAD in this cohort using computed tomography angiography (CTCA) and evaluate differences in the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors between those with and without obstructive coronary disease. Over 23 months, 866 patients with NACP underwent CTCA. Patients were separated into three groups for analysis depending on the degree of CAD on CTCA using the CAD-RADS (Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System) scoring system; no evidence of CAD (group 1), a degree of CAD requiring medical therapy only (group 2), significant CAD defined as a CAD-RADS score 4A/B or 5 (group 3). Cardiovascular risk factors were compared between the groups. We found 11.5% had significant CAD (group 3), 58.3% required medical therapy (group 2) and 30.1% had no CAD (group 1). There were 32 patients who required coronary revascularisation. Patients in group 2 and 3 were more likely to be male (p<0.001) and older (p<0.001) when compared to patients in group 1. Patients in group 3 were more likely to be hypertensive (p=0.008) and have higher Qrisk2 scores (p<0.001) when compared with those in group 1. In conclusion, NICE guidelines for NACP may result in a significant proportion of patients with CAD being underdiagnosed, including some with severe disease requiring revascularisation. This analysis suggests age, male gender, Qrisk2 score and hypertension are predictors of CAD in this cohort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.