AIMS: We investigated the feasibility of assessing coronary artery stent restenosis using a new generation 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography-scanner (MDCT) in comparison to conventional quantitative angiography. METHODS AND RESULTS: MDCT was performed in 64 consecutive patients (mean age 58+/-10 years) with previously implanted coronary artery stents (102 stented lesions: mean stent diameter 3.17+/-0.38 mm). Each stent was classified as 'evaluable' or 'unevaluable', and in evaluable stents, the presence of in-stent restenosis (diameter reduction >50%) was determined visually. Results were verified against invasive, quantitative coronary angiography. Fifty-nine stented lesions (58%) were classified as evaluable in MDCT. The mean diameter of evaluable stents was 3.28+/-0.40 mm, whereas the mean diameter of non-evaluable stents was 3.03+/-0.31 mm (P=0.0002). Overall, six of 12 in-stent restenoses were correctly detected by MDCT [50% sensitivity (confidence interval 22-77%)] and in 51 of 90 lesions, in-stent restenosis was correctly ruled out [57% specificity (46-67%)]. In evaluable stents, six of seven in-stent restenoses were correctly detected, and the absence of in-stent stenosis was correctly identified in 51 of 52 cases [sensitivity 86% (42-99%) and specificity 98% (88-100%)]. CONCLUSION: Stent type and diameter influence evaluability concerning in-stent restenosis by MDCT. The rate of assessable stents is low, but in evaluable stents, accuracy for detection of in-stent restenosis can be high.
AIMS: We investigated the feasibility of assessing coronary artery stent restenosis using a new generation 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography-scanner (MDCT) in comparison to conventional quantitative angiography. METHODS AND RESULTS: MDCT was performed in 64 consecutive patients (mean age 58+/-10 years) with previously implanted coronary artery stents (102 stented lesions: mean stent diameter 3.17+/-0.38 mm). Each stent was classified as 'evaluable' or 'unevaluable', and in evaluable stents, the presence of in-stent restenosis (diameter reduction >50%) was determined visually. Results were verified against invasive, quantitative coronary angiography. Fifty-nine stented lesions (58%) were classified as evaluable in MDCT. The mean diameter of evaluable stents was 3.28+/-0.40 mm, whereas the mean diameter of non-evaluable stents was 3.03+/-0.31 mm (P=0.0002). Overall, six of 12 in-stent restenoses were correctly detected by MDCT [50% sensitivity (confidence interval 22-77%)] and in 51 of 90 lesions, in-stent restenosis was correctly ruled out [57% specificity (46-67%)]. In evaluable stents, six of seven in-stent restenoses were correctly detected, and the absence of in-stent stenosis was correctly identified in 51 of 52 cases [sensitivity 86% (42-99%) and specificity 98% (88-100%)]. CONCLUSION: Stent type and diameter influence evaluability concerning in-stent restenosis by MDCT. The rate of assessable stents is low, but in evaluable stents, accuracy for detection of in-stent restenosis can be high.
Authors: T Schlosser; T Scheuermann; S Ulzheimer; O K Mohrs; M Kühling; P E Albrecht; T Voigtländer; J Barkhausen; A Schmermund Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2007-08-21 Impact factor: 5.460
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