OBJECTIVE: To analyse coronary stents with multislice spiral computed tomography (MSCT) in comparison with coronary angiography. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 310 patients referred for conventional coronary angiography underwent MSCT on the next day (16 x 0.75 mm cross section, 420 ms rotation, 110 ml contrast agent intravenously at 4 ml/s). Two independent blinded reviewers analysed the MSCT. RESULTS: 143 patients had previous stenting (232 stents) and 190 (82%) of the 232 stents were detected. Intrastent lumen was interpretable in 126 (64%) of the detected stents. Lumen interpretability depended on stent diameter: for stent diameter > 3 mm, 81% of lumens were interpretable, as against 51% with < or = 3 mm stent diameter (p < 0.001). Restenosis detection likewise depended on stent diameter: with small stents (< or = 3 mm), sensitivity and specificity of MSCT were 54% and 100%, respectively; positive and negative predictive values were 100% and 94%. For stents with > 3 mm diameter, corresponding values were 86%, 100%, 100%, and 99%. CONCLUSION: 16 slice MSCT allows analysis of in-stent lumen in about half of all stented angioplasties. It performs better when stent diameter is more than 3 mm and may offer a non-invasive alternative to conventional coronary angiography for monitoring stented coronary arteries. Technical progress may improve interpretability and hence increase the yield of MSCT in this application.
OBJECTIVE: To analyse coronary stents with multislice spiral computed tomography (MSCT) in comparison with coronary angiography. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 310 patients referred for conventional coronary angiography underwent MSCT on the next day (16 x 0.75 mm cross section, 420 ms rotation, 110 ml contrast agent intravenously at 4 ml/s). Two independent blinded reviewers analysed the MSCT. RESULTS: 143 patients had previous stenting (232 stents) and 190 (82%) of the 232 stents were detected. Intrastent lumen was interpretable in 126 (64%) of the detected stents. Lumen interpretability depended on stent diameter: for stent diameter > 3 mm, 81% of lumens were interpretable, as against 51% with < or = 3 mm stent diameter (p < 0.001). Restenosis detection likewise depended on stent diameter: with small stents (< or = 3 mm), sensitivity and specificity of MSCT were 54% and 100%, respectively; positive and negative predictive values were 100% and 94%. For stents with > 3 mm diameter, corresponding values were 86%, 100%, 100%, and 99%. CONCLUSION: 16 slice MSCT allows analysis of in-stent lumen in about half of all stented angioplasties. It performs better when stent diameter is more than 3 mm and may offer a non-invasive alternative to conventional coronary angiography for monitoring stented coronary arteries. Technical progress may improve interpretability and hence increase the yield of MSCT in this application.
Authors: David Maintz; Harald Seifarth; Thomas Flohr; Stefan Krämer; Thomas Wichter; Walter Heindel; Roman Fischbach Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Stefan Krüger; Andreas H Mahnken; Anil M Sinha; Anja Borghans; Katrin Dedden; Rainer Hoffmann; Peter Hanrath Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Andreas H Mahnken; Arno Buecker; Joachim E Wildberger; Alexander Ruebben; Sven Stanzel; Felix Vogt; Rolf W Günther; Rüdiger Blindt Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: S Schroeder; A F Kopp; A Baumbach; C Meisner; A Kuettner; C Georg; B Ohnesorge; C Herdeg; C D Claussen; K R Karsch Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Koen Nieman; Filippo Cademartiri; Pedro A Lemos; Rolf Raaijmakers; Peter M T Pattynama; Pim J de Feyter Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-10-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Michael J Zellweger; Markus Weinbacher; Andreas W Zutter; Raban V Jeger; Jan Mueller-Brand; Christoph Kaiser; Peter T Buser; Matthias E Pfisterer Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-07-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Dieter Ropers; Ulrich Baum; Karsten Pohle; Katharina Anders; Stefan Ulzheimer; Bernd Ohnesorge; Christian Schlundt; Werner Bautz; Werner G Daniel; Stephan Achenbach Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-02-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Alexander W Leber; Andreas Knez; Alexander Becker; Christoph Becker; Franz von Ziegler; Konstantin Nikolaou; Carsten Rist; Maximilian Reiser; Carl White; Gerhard Steinbeck; Peter Boekstegers Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-04-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Stefanie Mangold; Paola M Cannaó; U Joseph Schoepf; Julian L Wichmann; Christian Canstein; Stephen R Fuller; Giuseppe Muscogiuri; Akos Varga-Szemes; Konstantin Nikolaou; Carlo N De Cecco Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Tiziano Schepis; Pascal Koepfli; Sebastian Leschka; Lotus Desbiolles; Lars Husmann; Oliver Gaemperli; Franz R Eberli; Simon Wildermuth; Borut Marincek; Thomas F Lüscher; Hatem Alkadhi; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-01-06 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: B J W Chow; E Larose; S Bilodeau; M L Ellins; P Galiwango; M Kass; T Sheth; D S Jassal; I D C Kirkpatrick; G B John Mancini; J Mayo; A Abraham; J White Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: Julie M Miller; Marc Dewey; Andrea L Vavere; Carlos E Rochitte; Hiroyuki Niinuma; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Narinder Paul; John Hoe; Albert de Roos; Kunihiro Yoshioka; Pedro A Lemos; David E Bush; Albert C Lardo; John Texter; Jeffery Brinker; Christopher Cox; Melvin E Clouse; João A C Lima Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-11-08 Impact factor: 5.315