Literature DB >> 19083928

Prognosis by coronary computed tomographic angiography: matched comparison with myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography.

Leslee J Shaw1, Daniel S Berman, Robert C Hendel, Salvador Borges Neto, James K Min, Tracy Q Callister.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) is high with few reports noting its ability to stratify risk. The quantity and quality of prognostic evidence with myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) (MPS) is diverse, with little comparative evidence between methods. The aim of this report was to compare all-cause death rates for 7 CTA subsets, using the Duke prognostic index, compared with percentage of ischemic myocardium by MPS.
METHODS: We performed a matched cohort comparison of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) referred for evaluation of new onset chest pain with 693 and 3067 patients undergoing CTA and MPS. The primary endpoint was time to all-cause death estimated with univariable and multivariable (controlling for pretest CAD likelihood and cardiac risk factors) Cox proportional hazards models. Patients undergoing MPS were matched, using a propensity scoring technique, to the CTA cohort, yielding 16%, 60%, and 24% of the patients with low, intermediate, and high pretest CAD likelihood (P = 0.39).
RESULTS: Two-year mortality was similar for CTA and MPS at 3.2% (P = 0.71). For CTA, the Duke prognostic index was independently predictive of death in risk-adjusted models controlling for risk factors and pretest likelihood of CAD (P < 0.0001). Patients with <50% stenosis had the highest survival at 99.7%. Survival worsened from 96% for patients with 2 moderate stenoses or 1 >or=70% stenosis (P = 0.013) to 85% survival for patients with >or=50% left main stenosis (P < 0.0001). For MPS, the percentage of ischemic myocardium was independently predictive of death (P < 0.0001). For patients with no MPS ischemia, 100% survival was observed. Survival worsened from 94.0% to 83.0% for patients with 5% to >or=20% ischemic myocardium (P < 0.0001). In the comparative analysis of CTA to MPS, annual mortality rates were similar with the Duke CAD index compared with the percentage of ischemic myocardium (P = 0.53). Annual mortality rates ranged from 0.1% to 11.7% by the extent and severity of abnormalities noted on CTA and MPS (P = 0.53).
CONCLUSION: A directly proportional relation was observed between the extent and severity of MPS ischemia and angiographic CAD. High-risk ischemia is more often associated with extensive CAD and high mortality risk. The results from this matched, observational study require additional validation for longer-term predictive models that include major adverse cardiovascular events and diverse patient subsets.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19083928     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2007.12.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr        ISSN: 1876-861X


  12 in total

1.  Prognostic value of automated vs visual analysis for adenosine stress myocardial perfusion SPECT in patients without prior coronary artery disease: a case-control study.

Authors:  Yuan Xu; Ryo Nakazato; Sean Hayes; Rory Hachamovitch; Victor Y Cheng; Heidi Gransar; Romalisa Miranda-Peats; Mark Hyun; Leslee J Shaw; John Friedman; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman; Piotr J Slomka
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 2.  Quantitative analysis of perfusion studies: strengths and pitfalls.

Authors:  Piotr Slomka; Yuan Xu; Daniel Berman; Guido Germano
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 3.  Prognostic utility of coronary computed tomographic angiography.

Authors:  Yuka Otaki; Daniel S Berman; James K Min
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2013-04-12

4.  Prognostic value of computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with chest pain of suspected cardiac origin.

Authors:  E Maffei; S Seitun; C Martini; A Aldrovandi; G Cervellin; C Tedeschi; A Guaricci; G Messalli; O Catalano; F Cademartiri
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 5.  Coronary CT angiography: clinical utility and prognosis.

Authors:  James K Min; Fay Y Lin; Shahryar Saba
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.931

6.  Myocardial perfusion imaging with first-pass computed tomographic imaging: Measurement of coronary flow reserve in an animal model of regional hyperemia.

Authors:  Timothy F Christian; Mei Lee Frankish; Jennifer H Sisemoore; Madeline R Christian; George Gentchos; Stephen P Bell; Michael Jerosch-Herold
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2010-05-15       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Prognostic value of coronary artery calcium score and coronary CT angiography in patients with intermediate risk of coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Mario Petretta; Stefania Daniele; Wanda Acampa; Massimo Imbriaco; Teresa Pellegrino; Giancarlo Messalli; Evgjeni Xhoxhi; Giuseppina Del Prete; Carmela Nappi; Domenico Accardo; Francesco Angeloni; Domenico Bonaduce; Alberto Cuocolo
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2011-09-16       Impact factor: 2.357

8.  Prognostic value of Morise clinical score, calcium score and computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease.

Authors:  E Maffei; S Seitun; A Palumbo; C Martini; E Emiliano; A Cuttone; A Aldrovandi; R Malagò; L La Grutta; M Midiri; C Tedeschi; R De Rosa; O Catalano; A Weustink; N Mollet; F Cademartiri
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 3.469

9.  Cardiac CT vs. Stress Testing in Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: Review and Expert Recommendations.

Authors:  Amir Ali Rahsepar; Armin Arbab-Zadeh
Journal:  Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep       Date:  2015-06-17

10.  Stress testing and non-invasive coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: time for a new paradigm.

Authors:  Armin Arbab-Zadeh
Journal:  Heart Int       Date:  2012-02-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.