The OVERALL OBJECTVE of this post-market, multicenter, longitudinal, prospective, consecutive cohort study is to compare clinical outcomes, resource utilization, and quality of life (QOL) in subjects receiving standard practice evaluation and treatment versus subjects receiving FFRCT-guided evaluation and treatment in subjects with suspected CAD in order to further inform patients, health care providers, and other stakeholders about which technologies are most effective and efficient in the diagnosis of CAD. Cohort 1 of this study will assess outcomes incorporating standard practice evaluation and Cohort 2 will assess outcomes incorporating FFRCT-guided evaluation. Each Cohort will be further delineated based upon initial presentation, whereas subjects presenting for initial non-invasive testing will be designated as Cohorts 1A and 2A; and subjects already referred for ICA will be designated as Cohorts 1B and 2B.~SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES for sequential cohort comparisons:~To compare the rate of ICA documenting non-obstructive coronary artery disease, clinical outcomes, and QOL following standard practice for diagnostic and treatment planning modalities in Cohort 1 versus incorporating FFRCT as the preferred test to guide further invasive management and medical treatment in Cohort 2;~To compare resource utilization following standard practice for diagnostic and treatment pathways in Cohort 1 versus incorporating FFRCT as the preferred test to guide further invasive management and medical treatment in Cohort 2;~To provide supporting data for generating new guidelines for diagnosis and prognosis of CAD with comparative analysis of the risk stratification with the Updated Diamond-Forrester risk model (UDF);~To provide society including patients, health care providers and other stakeholders with information about which diagnostic technologies are most effective and efficient in managing patients with CAD.
The objective of the PLATFORM Study is to compare clinical outcomes, resource utilization, and quality of life (QOL) of FFRCT-guided evaluation versus standard practice evaluation in patients with suspected CAD in order to further inform patients, health care providers, and other stakeholders about which technologies are most effective and efficient in the diagnosis of CAD