Usefulness of comprehensive cardiothoracic computed tomography in the evaluation of acute undifferentiated chest discomfort in the emergency department (CAPTURE)

Ian S. Rogers, Dahlia Banerji, Emily L. Siegel, Quynh A. Truong, Brian B. Ghoshhajra, Thomas Irlbeck, Suhny Abbara, Rajiv Gupta, Ricardo J. Benenstein, Garry Choy, Laura L. Avery, Robert A. Novelline, Fabian Bamberg, Thomas J. Brady, John T. Nagurney, Udo Hoffmann

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Newer cardiac computed tomographic (CT) technology has permitted comprehensive cardiothoracic evaluations for coronary artery disease, pulmonary embolism, and aortic dissection within a single breath hold, independent of the heart rate. We conducted a randomized diagnostic trial to compare the efficiency of a comprehensive cardiothoracic CT examination in the evaluation of patients presenting to the emergency department with undifferentiated acute chest discomfort or dyspnea. We randomized the emergency department patients clinically scheduled to undergo a dedicated CT protocol to assess coronary artery disease, pulmonary embolism, or aortic dissection to either the planned dedicated CT protocol or a comprehensive cardiothoracic CT protocol. All CT examinations were performed using a 64-slice dual source CT scanner. The CT results were immediately communicated to the emergency department providers, who directed further management at their discretion. The subjects were then followed for the remainder of their hospitalization and for 30 days after hospitalization. Overall, 59 patients (mean age 51.2 ± 11.4 years, 72.9% men) were randomized to either dedicated (n = 30) or comprehensive (n = 29) CT scanning. No significant difference was found in the median length of stay (7.6 vs 8.2 hours, p = 0.79), rate of hospital discharge without additional imaging (70% vs 69%, p = 0.99), median interval to exclusion of an acute event (5.2 vs 6.5 hours, p = 0.64), costs of care (p = 0.16), or the number of revisits (p = 0.13) between the dedicated and comprehensive arms, respectively. In addition, radiation exposure (11.3 mSv vs 12.8 mSv, p = 0.16) and the frequency of incidental findings requiring follow-up (24.1% vs 33.3%, p = 0.57) were similar between the 2 arms. Comprehensive cardiothoracic CT scanning was feasible, with a similar diagnostic yield to dedicated protocols. However, it did not reduce the length of stay, rate of subsequent testing, or costs. In conclusion, although this "triple rule out" protocol might be helpful in the evaluation of select patients, these findings suggest that it should not be used routinely with the expectation that it will improve efficiency or reduce resource use.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)643-650
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume107
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2011

Fingerprint

Hospital Emergency Service
Thorax
Tomography
Pulmonary Embolism
Dissection
Coronary Artery Disease
Length of Stay
Hospitalization
Arm
Costs and Cost Analysis
Incidental Findings
Dyspnea
Heart Rate
Technology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Usefulness of comprehensive cardiothoracic computed tomography in the evaluation of acute undifferentiated chest discomfort in the emergency department (CAPTURE). / Rogers, Ian S.; Banerji, Dahlia; Siegel, Emily L.; Truong, Quynh A.; Ghoshhajra, Brian B.; Irlbeck, Thomas; Abbara, Suhny; Gupta, Rajiv; Benenstein, Ricardo J.; Choy, Garry; Avery, Laura L.; Novelline, Robert A.; Bamberg, Fabian; Brady, Thomas J.; Nagurney, John T.; Hoffmann, Udo.

In: American Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 107, No. 5, 01.03.2011, p. 643-650.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rogers, IS, Banerji, D, Siegel, EL, Truong, QA, Ghoshhajra, BB, Irlbeck, T, Abbara, S, Gupta, R, Benenstein, RJ, Choy, G, Avery, LL, Novelline, RA, Bamberg, F, Brady, TJ, Nagurney, JT & Hoffmann, U 2011, 'Usefulness of comprehensive cardiothoracic computed tomography in the evaluation of acute undifferentiated chest discomfort in the emergency department (CAPTURE)', American Journal of Cardiology, vol. 107, no. 5, pp. 643-650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.10.039
Rogers, Ian S. ; Banerji, Dahlia ; Siegel, Emily L. ; Truong, Quynh A. ; Ghoshhajra, Brian B. ; Irlbeck, Thomas ; Abbara, Suhny ; Gupta, Rajiv ; Benenstein, Ricardo J. ; Choy, Garry ; Avery, Laura L. ; Novelline, Robert A. ; Bamberg, Fabian ; Brady, Thomas J. ; Nagurney, John T. ; Hoffmann, Udo. / Usefulness of comprehensive cardiothoracic computed tomography in the evaluation of acute undifferentiated chest discomfort in the emergency department (CAPTURE). In: American Journal of Cardiology. 2011 ; Vol. 107, No. 5. pp. 643-650.
@article{2e91b316986c47c5950f4f4f5b97d661,
title = "Usefulness of comprehensive cardiothoracic computed tomography in the evaluation of acute undifferentiated chest discomfort in the emergency department (CAPTURE)",
abstract = "Newer cardiac computed tomographic (CT) technology has permitted comprehensive cardiothoracic evaluations for coronary artery disease, pulmonary embolism, and aortic dissection within a single breath hold, independent of the heart rate. We conducted a randomized diagnostic trial to compare the efficiency of a comprehensive cardiothoracic CT examination in the evaluation of patients presenting to the emergency department with undifferentiated acute chest discomfort or dyspnea. We randomized the emergency department patients clinically scheduled to undergo a dedicated CT protocol to assess coronary artery disease, pulmonary embolism, or aortic dissection to either the planned dedicated CT protocol or a comprehensive cardiothoracic CT protocol. All CT examinations were performed using a 64-slice dual source CT scanner. The CT results were immediately communicated to the emergency department providers, who directed further management at their discretion. The subjects were then followed for the remainder of their hospitalization and for 30 days after hospitalization. Overall, 59 patients (mean age 51.2 ± 11.4 years, 72.9{\%} men) were randomized to either dedicated (n = 30) or comprehensive (n = 29) CT scanning. No significant difference was found in the median length of stay (7.6 vs 8.2 hours, p = 0.79), rate of hospital discharge without additional imaging (70{\%} vs 69{\%}, p = 0.99), median interval to exclusion of an acute event (5.2 vs 6.5 hours, p = 0.64), costs of care (p = 0.16), or the number of revisits (p = 0.13) between the dedicated and comprehensive arms, respectively. In addition, radiation exposure (11.3 mSv vs 12.8 mSv, p = 0.16) and the frequency of incidental findings requiring follow-up (24.1{\%} vs 33.3{\%}, p = 0.57) were similar between the 2 arms. Comprehensive cardiothoracic CT scanning was feasible, with a similar diagnostic yield to dedicated protocols. However, it did not reduce the length of stay, rate of subsequent testing, or costs. In conclusion, although this {"}triple rule out{"} protocol might be helpful in the evaluation of select patients, these findings suggest that it should not be used routinely with the expectation that it will improve efficiency or reduce resource use.",
author = "Rogers, {Ian S.} and Dahlia Banerji and Siegel, {Emily L.} and Truong, {Quynh A.} and Ghoshhajra, {Brian B.} and Thomas Irlbeck and Suhny Abbara and Rajiv Gupta and Benenstein, {Ricardo J.} and Garry Choy and Avery, {Laura L.} and Novelline, {Robert A.} and Fabian Bamberg and Brady, {Thomas J.} and Nagurney, {John T.} and Udo Hoffmann",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.10.039",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "107",
pages = "643--650",
journal = "American Journal of Cardiology",
issn = "0002-9149",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Usefulness of comprehensive cardiothoracic computed tomography in the evaluation of acute undifferentiated chest discomfort in the emergency department (CAPTURE)

AU - Rogers, Ian S.

AU - Banerji, Dahlia

AU - Siegel, Emily L.

AU - Truong, Quynh A.

AU - Ghoshhajra, Brian B.

AU - Irlbeck, Thomas

AU - Abbara, Suhny

AU - Gupta, Rajiv

AU - Benenstein, Ricardo J.

AU - Choy, Garry

AU - Avery, Laura L.

AU - Novelline, Robert A.

AU - Bamberg, Fabian

AU - Brady, Thomas J.

AU - Nagurney, John T.

AU - Hoffmann, Udo

PY - 2011/3/1

Y1 - 2011/3/1

N2 - Newer cardiac computed tomographic (CT) technology has permitted comprehensive cardiothoracic evaluations for coronary artery disease, pulmonary embolism, and aortic dissection within a single breath hold, independent of the heart rate. We conducted a randomized diagnostic trial to compare the efficiency of a comprehensive cardiothoracic CT examination in the evaluation of patients presenting to the emergency department with undifferentiated acute chest discomfort or dyspnea. We randomized the emergency department patients clinically scheduled to undergo a dedicated CT protocol to assess coronary artery disease, pulmonary embolism, or aortic dissection to either the planned dedicated CT protocol or a comprehensive cardiothoracic CT protocol. All CT examinations were performed using a 64-slice dual source CT scanner. The CT results were immediately communicated to the emergency department providers, who directed further management at their discretion. The subjects were then followed for the remainder of their hospitalization and for 30 days after hospitalization. Overall, 59 patients (mean age 51.2 ± 11.4 years, 72.9% men) were randomized to either dedicated (n = 30) or comprehensive (n = 29) CT scanning. No significant difference was found in the median length of stay (7.6 vs 8.2 hours, p = 0.79), rate of hospital discharge without additional imaging (70% vs 69%, p = 0.99), median interval to exclusion of an acute event (5.2 vs 6.5 hours, p = 0.64), costs of care (p = 0.16), or the number of revisits (p = 0.13) between the dedicated and comprehensive arms, respectively. In addition, radiation exposure (11.3 mSv vs 12.8 mSv, p = 0.16) and the frequency of incidental findings requiring follow-up (24.1% vs 33.3%, p = 0.57) were similar between the 2 arms. Comprehensive cardiothoracic CT scanning was feasible, with a similar diagnostic yield to dedicated protocols. However, it did not reduce the length of stay, rate of subsequent testing, or costs. In conclusion, although this "triple rule out" protocol might be helpful in the evaluation of select patients, these findings suggest that it should not be used routinely with the expectation that it will improve efficiency or reduce resource use.

AB - Newer cardiac computed tomographic (CT) technology has permitted comprehensive cardiothoracic evaluations for coronary artery disease, pulmonary embolism, and aortic dissection within a single breath hold, independent of the heart rate. We conducted a randomized diagnostic trial to compare the efficiency of a comprehensive cardiothoracic CT examination in the evaluation of patients presenting to the emergency department with undifferentiated acute chest discomfort or dyspnea. We randomized the emergency department patients clinically scheduled to undergo a dedicated CT protocol to assess coronary artery disease, pulmonary embolism, or aortic dissection to either the planned dedicated CT protocol or a comprehensive cardiothoracic CT protocol. All CT examinations were performed using a 64-slice dual source CT scanner. The CT results were immediately communicated to the emergency department providers, who directed further management at their discretion. The subjects were then followed for the remainder of their hospitalization and for 30 days after hospitalization. Overall, 59 patients (mean age 51.2 ± 11.4 years, 72.9% men) were randomized to either dedicated (n = 30) or comprehensive (n = 29) CT scanning. No significant difference was found in the median length of stay (7.6 vs 8.2 hours, p = 0.79), rate of hospital discharge without additional imaging (70% vs 69%, p = 0.99), median interval to exclusion of an acute event (5.2 vs 6.5 hours, p = 0.64), costs of care (p = 0.16), or the number of revisits (p = 0.13) between the dedicated and comprehensive arms, respectively. In addition, radiation exposure (11.3 mSv vs 12.8 mSv, p = 0.16) and the frequency of incidental findings requiring follow-up (24.1% vs 33.3%, p = 0.57) were similar between the 2 arms. Comprehensive cardiothoracic CT scanning was feasible, with a similar diagnostic yield to dedicated protocols. However, it did not reduce the length of stay, rate of subsequent testing, or costs. In conclusion, although this "triple rule out" protocol might be helpful in the evaluation of select patients, these findings suggest that it should not be used routinely with the expectation that it will improve efficiency or reduce resource use.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951581829&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79951581829&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.10.039

DO - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.10.039

M3 - Article

VL - 107

SP - 643

EP - 650

JO - American Journal of Cardiology

JF - American Journal of Cardiology

SN - 0002-9149

IS - 5

ER -