Prognostic value of CAD-RADS classification by coronary CTA in patients with suspected CAD.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The study sought to compare Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) classification with traditional coronary artery disease (CAD) classifications and Duke Prognostic CAD Index for predicting the risk of all-cause mortality in patients with suspected CAD. METHODS: 9625 consecutive suspected CAD patients were assessed by coronary CTA for CAD-RADS classification, traditional CAD classifications and Duke Prognostic CAD Index. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox models were used to estimate all-cause mortality. Discriminatory ability of classifications was assessed using time dependent receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves and The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was employed to evaluate calibration. RESULTS: A total of 540 patients died from all causes with a median follow-up of 4.3 ± 2.1 years. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed the cumulative events increased significantly associated with CAD-RADS, three traditional CAD classifications and Duke Prognostic CAD Index. In multivariate Cox regressions, the risk for the all-cause death increased from HR 0.861 (95% CI 0.420-1.764) for CAD-RADS 1 to HR 2.761 (95% CI 1.961-3.887) for CAD-RADS 4B&5, using CAD-RADS 0 as the reference group. The relative HRs for all-cause death increased proportionally with the grades of the three traditional CAD classifications and Duke Prognostic CAD Index. The area under the time dependent ROC curve for prediction of all-cause death was 0.7917, 0.7805, 0.7991for CAD-RADS in 1 year, 3 year, 5 year, respectively, which was non-inferior to the traditional CAD classifications and Duke Prognostic CAD Index. CONCLUSIONS: The CAD-RADS classification provided important prognostic information for patients with suspected CAD with noninvasive evaluation, which was non-inferior than Duke Prognostic CAD Index and traditional stenosis-based grading schemes in prognostic value of all-cause mortality. Traditional and simplest CAD classification should be preferable, given the more number of groups and complexity of CAD-RADS and Duke prognostic index, without using more time consuming classification.