Literature DB >> 21324842

Coronary artery calcium scoring does not add prognostic value to standard 64-section CT angiography protocol in low-risk patients suspected of having coronary artery disease.

Sung Woo Kwon1, Young Jin Kim, Jaemin Shim, Ji Min Sung, Mi Eun Han, Dong Won Kang, Ji-Ye Kim, Byoung Wook Choi, Hyuk-Jae Chang.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the prognostic outcome of cardiac computed tomography (CT) for prediction of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in low-risk patients suspected of having coronary artery disease (CAD) and to explore the differential prognostic values of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring and coronary CT angiography.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review committee approval and informed consent were obtained. In 4338 patients who underwent 64-section CT for evaluation of suspected CAD, both CAC scoring and CT angiography were concurrently performed by using standard scanning protocols. Follow-up clinical outcome data regarding composite MACEs were procured. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were developed to predict MACEs. Risk-adjusted models incorporated traditional risk factors for CAC scoring and coronary CT angiography.
RESULTS: During the mean follow-up of 828 days ± 380, there were 105 MACEs, for an event rate of 3%. The presence of obstructive CAD at coronary CT angiography had independent prognostic value, which escalated according to the number of stenosed vessels (P < .001). In the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis, the superiority of coronary CT angiography to CAC scoring was demonstrated by a significantly greater area under the ROC curve (AUC) (0.892 vs 0.810, P < .001), whereas no significant incremental value for the addition of CAC scoring to coronary CT angiography was established (AUC = 0.892 for coronary CT angiography alone vs 0.902 with addition of CAC scoring, P = .198).
CONCLUSION: Coronary CT angiography is better than CAC scoring in predicting MACEs in low-risk patients suspected of having CAD. Furthermore, the current standard multisection CT protocol (coronary CT angiography combined with CAC scoring) has no incremental prognostic value compared with coronary CT angiography alone. Therefore, in terms of determining prognosis, CAC scoring may no longer need to be incorporated in the cardiac CT protocol in this population. © RSNA, 2011.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21324842     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10100886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  21 in total

1.  Prognostic value of cardiovascular CT: is coronary artery calcium screening enough? The added value of CCTA.

Authors:  Erick Alexanderson; Nadia Canseco-León; Fernando Iñarra; Aloha Meave; Damini Dey
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  Patient-centered imaging.

Authors:  E Gordon Depuey; John J Mahmarian; Todd D Miller; Andrew J Einstein; Christopher L Hansen; Thomas A Holly; Edward J Miller; Donna M Polk; L Samuel Wann
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Comparing ROC curves derived from regression models.

Authors:  Venkatraman E Seshan; Mithat Gönen; Colin B Begg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Deriving coronary artery calcium scores from CT coronary angiography: a proposed algorithm for evaluating stable chest pain.

Authors:  Christopher W Pavitt; Katie Harron; Alistair C Lindsay; Robin Ray; Sayeh Zielke; Daniel Gordon; Michael B Rubens; Simon P Padley; Edward D Nicol
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 2.357

5.  The prognostic significance of coronary CT angiography.

Authors:  Kevin M Woods; Collin Fischer; Michael K Cheezum; Edward A Hulten; Binh Nguyen; Todd C Villines
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.931

6.  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

7.  Evaluation of postmortem MDCT and MDCT-angiography for the investigation of sudden cardiac death related to atherosclerotic coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Katarzyna Michaud; Silke Grabherr; Francesco Doenz; Patrice Mangin
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-01-12       Impact factor: 2.357

8.  Influence of Cardiovascular Risk Factors on the Prevalence of Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients with Angiographically Normal Coronary Arteries.

Authors:  Daniel O Bittner; Lutz Klinghammer; Mohamed Marwan; Jasmin Schmid; Christian Layritz; Udo Hoffmann; Stephan Achenbach; Tobias Pflederer
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 9.  What is the role of calcium scoring in the age of coronary computed tomographic angiography?

Authors:  Parag H Joshi; Michael J Blaha; Roger S Blumenthal; Ron Blankstein; Khurram Nasir
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 5.952

10.  Coronary artery calcium score: Re-evaluation of its predictive value for coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Mansour Almoudi; Zhonghua Sun
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2012-10-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.