AimsCT calcium scoring (CTCS) and CT cardiac angiography (CTCA) are widely used in patients with stable chest pain to exclude significant coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to resolve uncertainty about the prevalence of obstructive coronary artery disease and long-term outcomes in patients with a zero-calcium score (ZCS).Methods and resultsConsecutive patients with stable cardiac symptoms referred for CTCS or CTCS and CTCA from chest pain clinics to a tertiary cardiothoracic centre were prospectively enrolled. In those with a ZCS, the prevalence of obstructive CAD on CTCA was determined. A follow-up for all-cause mortality was obtained from the NHS tracer service. A total of 3914 patients underwent CTCS of whom 2730 (69.7%) also had a CTCA. Half of the patients were men (50.3%) with a mean age of 56.9 years. Among patients who had both procedures, a ZCS was present in 52.2%, with a negative predictive value of 99.5% for excluding ≥70% stenosis on CTCA. During a mean follow-up of 5.2 years, the annual event rate was 0.3% for those with ZCS compared with 1.2% for CS ≥1. The presence of non-calcified atheroma on CTCA in patients with ZCS did not affect the prognostic value (P = 0.98).ConclusionIn patients with stable symptoms and a ZCS, obstructive CAD is rare, and prognosis over the long-term is excellent, regardless of whether non-calcified atheroma is identified. A ZCS could reliably be used as a ‘gatekeeper’ in this patient cohort, obviating the need for further more expensive tests.

ObjectiveTo describe the characteristics and outcomes of patients with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 and false-negative SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR), and develop and internally validate a diagnostic risk score to predict risk of COVID-19 (including RT-PCR-negative COVID-19) among medical admissions.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingTwo hospitals within an acute NHS Trust in London, UK.ParticipantsAll patients admitted to medical wards between 2 March and 3 May 2020.OutcomesMain outcomes were diagnosis of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results, sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and mortality during hospital admission. For the diagnostic risk score, we report discrimination, calibration and diagnostic accuracy of the model and simplified risk score and internal validation.Results4008 patients were admitted between 2 March and 3 May 2020. 1792 patients (44.8%) were diagnosed with COVID-19, of whom 1391 were SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive and 283 had only negative RT-PCRs. Compared with a clinical reference standard, sensitivity of RT-PCR in hospital patients was 83.1% (95% CI 81.2%–84.8%). Broadly, patients with false-negative RT-PCR COVID-19 and those confirmed by positive PCR had similar demographic and clinical characteristics but lower risk of intensive care unit admission and lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.27–0.61). A simple diagnostic risk score comprising of age, sex, ethnicity, cough, fever or shortness of breath, National Early Warning Score 2, C reactive protein and chest radiograph appearance had moderate discrimination (area under the receiver–operator curve 0.83, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.85), good calibration and was internally validated.ConclusionRT-PCR-negative COVID-19 is common and is associated with lower mortality despite similar presentation. Diagnostic risk scores could potentially help triage patients requiring admission but need external validation.

In conclusion, in the context of an acute admission, cardiothoracic ratio measured on postero-anterior or antero-posterior films has limited value in detecting moderate left ventricular and/or right ventricular systolic dysfunction. Previously established absolute values may be unreliable by modern standards.