OBJECTIVES: To evaluate CT coronary angiography (CTA) when compared with catheter coronary angiography (CCA), for the detection of coronary artery stenoses and rate of optimal coronary artery segment visualization. METHOD: Retrospective, two-center study enrolling 26 patients who underwent CCA and ECG-gated 16-detector CTA (slice thickness 0.6 mm; rotation 500 ms). RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: 283 segments were available for postprocessing. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value were, respectively, 80, 100, and 100%, for detecting more than 50% luminal stenoses, when optimally visualized segments were considered, in comparison to CCA. Negative predictive value was excellent (98%). Rate of non-optimally visualized coronary segments was 26%. Most clinical benefits of coronary CT angiography should probably be obtained when it is performed to exclude significant stenoses on selected populations of patients with a low pre-test probability of severe coronary artery disease, and under optimal conditions of controlled heart rate and minimal presence of calcium.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate CT coronary angiography (CTA) when compared with catheter coronary angiography (CCA), for the detection of coronary artery stenoses and rate of optimal coronary artery segment visualization. METHOD: Retrospective, two-center study enrolling 26 patients who underwent CCA and ECG-gated 16-detector CTA (slice thickness 0.6 mm; rotation 500 ms). RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: 283 segments were available for postprocessing. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value were, respectively, 80, 100, and 100%, for detecting more than 50% luminal stenoses, when optimally visualized segments were considered, in comparison to CCA. Negative predictive value was excellent (98%). Rate of non-optimally visualized coronary segments was 26%. Most clinical benefits of coronary CT angiography should probably be obtained when it is performed to exclude significant stenoses on selected populations of patients with a low pre-test probability of severe coronary artery disease, and under optimal conditions of controlled heart rate and minimal presence of calcium.
Authors: W G Austen; J E Edwards; R L Frye; G G Gensini; V L Gott; L S Griffith; D C McGoon; M L Murphy; B B Roe Journal: Circulation Date: 1975-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Joanne D Schuijf; Jeroen J Bax; Liesbeth P Salm; J Wouter Jukema; Hildo J Lamb; Ernst E van der Wall; Albert de Roos Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2005-03-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Filippo Cademartiri; Nico R Mollet; Pedro A Lemos; Franceso Saia; Giuseppe Runza; Massimo Midiri; Gabriel P Krestin; Pim J de Feyter Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2005-05-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Stephan Achenbach; Dieter Ropers; Axel Kuettner; Thomas Flohr; Bernd Ohnesorge; Herbert Bruder; Heike Theessen; Meri Karakaya; Werner G Daniel; Werner Bautz; Willi A Kalender; Katharina Anders Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2006-01-19 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Marco A S Cordeiro; Albert C Lardo; Marcelo S V Brito; Miguel A Rosário Neto; Maria H A Siqueira; José R Parga; Luiz F Avila; José A F Ramires; João A C Lima; Carlos E Rochitte Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2006-03-15 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Francesca Pugliese; Nico R A Mollet; Giuseppe Runza; Carlos van Mieghem; Willem B Meijboom; Patrizia Malagutti; Timo Baks; Gabriel P Krestin; Pim J deFeyter; Filippo Cademartiri Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-11-16 Impact factor: 5.315
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: Frank J Rybicki; Hansel J Otero; Michael L Steigner; Gabriel Vorobiof; Leelakrishna Nallamshetty; Dimitrios Mitsouras; Hale Ersoy; Richard T Mather; Philip F Judy; Tianxi Cai; Karl Coyner; Kurt Schultz; Amanda G Whitmore; Marcelo F Di Carli Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2008-03-27 Impact factor: 2.357