BACKGROUND: The accuracy of multidetector computed tomographic (CT) angiography involving 64 detectors has not been well established. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter study to examine the accuracy of 64-row, 0.5-mm multidetector CT angiography as compared with conventional coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Nine centers enrolled patients who underwent calcium scoring and multidetector CT angiography before conventional coronary angiography. In 291 patients with calcium scores of 600 or less, segments 1.5 mm or more in diameter were analyzed by means of CT and conventional angiography at independent core laboratories. Stenoses of 50% or more were considered obstructive. The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC) was used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy relative to that of conventional angiography and subsequent revascularization status, whereas disease severity was assessed with the use of the modified Duke Coronary Artery Disease Index. RESULTS: A total of 56% of patients had obstructive coronary artery disease. The patient-based diagnostic accuracy of quantitative CT angiography for detecting or ruling out stenoses of 50% or more according to conventional angiography revealed an AUC of 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 0.96), with a sensitivity of 85% (95% CI, 79 to 90), a specificity of 90% (95% CI, 83 to 94), a positive predictive value of 91% (95% CI, 86 to 95), and a negative predictive value of 83% (95% CI, 75 to 89). CT angiography was similar to conventional angiography in its ability to identify patients who subsequently underwent revascularization: the AUC was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.88) for multidetector CT angiography and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.86) for conventional angiography. A per-vessel analysis of 866 vessels yielded an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.88 to 0.93). Disease severity ascertained by CT and conventional angiography was well correlated (r=0.81; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.84). Two patients had important reactions to contrast medium after CT angiography. CONCLUSIONS: Multidetector CT angiography accurately identifies the presence and severity of obstructive coronary artery disease and subsequent revascularization in symptomatic patients. The negative and positive predictive values indicate that multidetector CT angiography cannot replace conventional coronary angiography at present. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00738218.) 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society
BACKGROUND: The accuracy of multidetector computed tomographic (CT) angiography involving 64 detectors has not been well established. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter study to examine the accuracy of 64-row, 0.5-mm multidetector CT angiography as compared with conventional coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Nine centers enrolled patients who underwent calcium scoring and multidetector CT angiography before conventional coronary angiography. In 291 patients with calcium scores of 600 or less, segments 1.5 mm or more in diameter were analyzed by means of CT and conventional angiography at independent core laboratories. Stenoses of 50% or more were considered obstructive. The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC) was used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy relative to that of conventional angiography and subsequent revascularization status, whereas disease severity was assessed with the use of the modified Duke Coronary Artery Disease Index. RESULTS: A total of 56% of patients had obstructive coronary artery disease. The patient-based diagnostic accuracy of quantitative CT angiography for detecting or ruling out stenoses of 50% or more according to conventional angiography revealed an AUC of 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 0.96), with a sensitivity of 85% (95% CI, 79 to 90), a specificity of 90% (95% CI, 83 to 94), a positive predictive value of 91% (95% CI, 86 to 95), and a negative predictive value of 83% (95% CI, 75 to 89). CT angiography was similar to conventional angiography in its ability to identify patients who subsequently underwent revascularization: the AUC was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.88) for multidetector CT angiography and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.86) for conventional angiography. A per-vessel analysis of 866 vessels yielded an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.88 to 0.93). Disease severity ascertained by CT and conventional angiography was well correlated (r=0.81; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.84). Two patients had important reactions to contrast medium after CT angiography. CONCLUSIONS: Multidetector CT angiography accurately identifies the presence and severity of obstructive coronary artery disease and subsequent revascularization in symptomatic patients. The negative and positive predictive values indicate that multidetector CT angiography cannot replace conventional coronary angiography at present. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00738218.) 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society
Authors: Satoru Kishi; Tiago A Magalhaes; Richard T George; Marc Dewey; Roger J Laham; Hiroyuki Niinuma; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Christopher Cox; Yutaka Tanami; Joanne D Schuijf; Andrea L Vavere; Kakuya Kitagawa; Marcus Y Chen; Cesar H Nomura; Jeffrey A Brinker; Frank J Rybicki; Marcelo F Di Carli; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Joao A C Lima Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-11-02 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Andrea L Vavere; Gregory G Simon; Richard T George; Carlos E Rochitte; Andrew E Arai; Julie M Miller; Marcello Di Carli; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Armin A Zadeh; Marc Dewey; Hiroyuki Niinuma; Roger Laham; Frank J Rybicki; Joanne D Schuijf; Narinder Paul; John Hoe; Sachio Kuribyashi; Hajime Sakuma; Cesar Nomura; Tan Swee Yaw; Klaus F Kofoed; Kunihiro Yoshioka; Melvin E Clouse; Jeffrey Brinker; Christopher Cox; Joao A C Lima Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2011-11-12
Authors: E di Cesare; I Carbone; A Carriero; M Centonze; F De Cobelli; R De Rosa; P Di Renzi; A Esposito; R Faletti; R Fattori; M Francone; A Giovagnoni; L La Grutta; G Ligabue; L Lovato; R Marano; M Midiri; L Natale; A Romagnoli; V Russo; F Sardanelli; F Cademartiri Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2012-04-01 Impact factor: 3.469