CT heart scan versus invasive angiography in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome
Compares a CT heart scan with invasive angiography in acute coronary syndrome.
Plain-language title generated from the registry record
Registry title: Coronary Computed Tomography Versus Invasive Angiography for Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome
Key facts
- Where
- Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Hillerød, and Hvidovre, DenmarkSee the 6 sites
Where in Denmark
- Bispebjerg HospitalBispebjerg, DenmarkTaking people
- Herlev and Gentofte HospitalCopenhagen, DenmarkTaking people
- RigshospitaletCopenhagen, DenmarkTaking people
- Zealand University HospitalCopenhagen, DenmarkTaking people
- North Zealand HospitalHillerød, DenmarkTaking people
- Hvidovre HospitalHvidovre, DenmarkTaking people
Questions to ask the study team
- How often do I need to come in, and for how long each time?
- Are travel costs paid?
- Can I keep my own doctor?
- What happens if I want to stop?
Trial details
- Who runs it
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet
- Trial code
- NCT06101862
- Record updated
- 19 February 2025
- Original description
Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is a widely accepted initial diagnostic test for individuals suspected of having chronic coronary syndromes. However, there is limited evidence supporting its use in the acute setting. So far, no large-scale randomized trial has examined the performance of CCTA as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in individuals with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEACS).Read full original descriptionShow less
Team-based Interventional Triage in Acute Coronary Syndrome Based on Non-Invasive Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography - a Randomized Trial
Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is a widely accepted initial diagnostic test for individuals suspected of having chronic coronary syndromes. However, there is limited evidence supporting its use in the acute setting. So far, no large-scale randomized trial has examined the performance of CCTA as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in individuals with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEACS).
If CCTA were to replace ICA as a routine procedure for individuals with NSTEACS, it could reduce the risk of complications related to ICA, improve patient comfort, expedite decision-making, and reduce healthcare expenses and interhospital transfers.
Inclusion: Admitted with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina pectoris and an indication for subacute ICA; Elevated troponin or ischemic electrocardiographic changes; Written informed consent.
Exclusion: Prior CCTA or ICA during index admission or within 1 week; Previously randomized in this trial; History of percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting; Probable type 2 acute myocardial infarction; Severe valvular heart disease as primary diagnosis or potential need for valve intervention; History of spontaneous coronary artery dissection; Known allergy to beta-blockers or contrast agent; Instability requiring acute or emergent ICA; Estimated glomerular filtration rate \< 30 mL/min/1.73m2; Expected poor quality of the CCTA; Pregnant or nursing.