Background—: The choice of imaging techniques in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) varies between countries, regions, and hospitals. This prospective, multicenter, comparative effectiveness study was designed to assess the relative accuracy of commonly used imaging techniques for identifying patients with significant CAD. Methods and Results—: A total of 475 patients with stable chest pain and intermediate likelihood of CAD underwent coronary computed tomographic angiography and stress myocardial perfusion imaging by single photon emission computed tomography or positron emission tomography, and ventricular wall motion imaging by stress echocardiography or cardiac magnetic resonance. If ≥1 test was abnormal, patients underwent invasive coronary angiography. Significant CAD was defined by invasive coronary angiography as >50% stenosis of the left main stem, >70% stenosis in a major coronary vessel, or 30% to 70% stenosis with fractional flow reserve ≤0.8. Significant CAD was present in 29% of patients. In a patient-based analysis, coronary computed tomographic angiography had the highest diagnostic accuracy, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve being 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.88–0.94), sensitivity being 91%, and specificity being 92%. Myocardial perfusion imaging had good diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve, 0.74; confidence interval, 0.69–0.78), sensitivity 74%, and specificity 73%. Wall motion imaging had similar accuracy (area under the curve, 0.70; confidence interval, 0.65–0.75) but lower sensitivity (49%, P <0.001) and higher specificity (92%, P <0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging and wall motion imaging were lower than that of coronary computed tomographic angiography ( P <0.001). Conclusions—: In a multicenter European population of patients with stable chest pain and low prevalence of CAD, coronary computed tomographic angiography is more accurate than noninvasive functional testing for detecting significant CAD defined invasively. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00979199.

Hybrid imaging provides a non-invasive assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion. We sought to evaluate the added clinical value of hybrid imaging in a multi-centre multi-vendor setting. Fourteen centres enrolled 252 patients with stable angina and intermediate (20-90%) pre-test likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS), CT coronary angiography (CTCA), and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) with fractional flow reserve (FFR). Hybrid MPS/CTCA images were obtained by 3D image fusion. Blinded core-lab analyses were performed for CTCA, MPS, QCA and hybrid datasets. Hemodynamically significant CAD was ruled-in non-invasively in the presence of a matched finding (myocardial perfusion defect co-localized with stenosed coronary artery) and ruled-out with normal findings (both CTCA and MPS normal). Overall prevalence of significant CAD on QCA (>70% stenosis or 30-70% with FFR≤0.80) was 37%. Of 1004 pathological myocardial segments on MPS, 246 (25%) were reclassified from their standard coronary distribution to another territory by hybrid imaging. In this respect, in 45/252 (18%) patients, hybrid imaging reassigned an entire perfusion defect to another coronary territory, changing the final diagnosis in 42% of the cases. Hybrid imaging allowed non-invasive CAD rule-out in 41%, and rule-in in 24% of patients, with a negative and positive predictive value of 88% and 87%, respectively. In patients at intermediate risk of CAD, hybrid imaging allows non-invasive co-localization of myocardial perfusion defects and subtending coronary arteries, impacting clinical decision-making in almost one every five subjects.

Background: Using data from the GARFIELD ‐ AF (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD –Atrial Fibrillation), we evaluated the impact of chronic kidney disease ( CKD ) stage on clinical outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation ( AF ). Methods and Results: GARFIELD ‐ AF is a prospective registry of patients from 35 countries, including patients from Asia (China, India, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Thailand). Consecutive patients enrolled (2013–2016) were classified with no, mild, or moderate‐to‐severe CKD , based on the National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative guidelines. Data on CKD status and outcomes were available for 33 024 of 34 854 patients (including 9491 patients from Asia); 10.9% (n=3613) had moderate‐to‐severe CKD , 16.9% (n=5595) mild CKD , and 72.1% (n=23 816) no CKD . The use of oral anticoagulants was influenced by stroke risk (ie, post hoc assessment of CHA ₂ DS ₂ ‐ VAS c score), but not by CKD stage. The quality of anticoagulant control with vitamin K antagonists did not differ with CKD stage. After adjusting for baseline characteristics and antithrombotic use, both mild and moderate‐to‐severe CKD were independent risk factors for all‐cause mortality. Moderate‐to‐severe CKD was independently associated with a higher risk of stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, new‐onset acute coronary syndrome, and new or worsening heart failure. The impact of moderate‐to‐severe CKD on mortality was significantly greater in patients from Asia than the rest of the world ( P =0.001). Conclusions: In GARFIELD ‐ AF , moderate‐to‐severe CKD was independently associated with stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality. The effect of moderate‐to‐severe CKD on mortality was even greater in patients from Asia than the rest of the world. Clinical Trial Registration: URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 01090362.