BACKGROUND: To assess clinical utility of computed tomography angiography (CTA) in the diagnosis of chest pain patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs), we conducted a meta-analysis of CTA in patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes (ACSs). METHODS: 386 studies were identified on initial review of literature. Inclusion criteria were: (1) prospective study with ≥1 month follow-up, (2) use of CTA in the ED setting, (3) use of ACC/AHA definitions for ACS and robust assessment of major adverse cardiac events, (4) ≥30 patients, and (5) study population with initial non-diagnostic ECGs and negative biomarkers. RESULTS: Nine studies (N = 1349) formed the data set. The pooled patient population was 52 ± 2 years of age, 51% male, with low to intermediate pretest probability for ACS. Risk factors included 12% diabetes, 42% hypertension, 35% smokers, 29% had hyperlipidemia, and 7% known CAD. ACS was subsequently diagnosed in 10% of patients. The bivariate summary estimate of sensitivity of CTA for ACS diagnosis was 95% (95% CI 88-100) and specificity was 87% (95% CI 83-92), yielding a negative likelihood ratio of 0.06 (95% CI 0-0.14) and positive likelihood ratio of 7.4 (95% CI 4.8-10). The 30-day event rate included no deaths and no additional MIs. CONCLUSION: Coronary CTA demonstrates a high sensitivity and a low negative likelihood ratio of 0.06, and is effective in ruling out the presence of ACS in low to intermediate risk patients presenting to the ED with acute chest pain.
BACKGROUND: To assess clinical utility of computed tomography angiography (CTA) in the diagnosis of chest painpatients presenting to emergency departments (EDs), we conducted a meta-analysis of CTA in patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes (ACSs). METHODS: 386 studies were identified on initial review of literature. Inclusion criteria were: (1) prospective study with ≥1 month follow-up, (2) use of CTA in the ED setting, (3) use of ACC/AHA definitions for ACS and robust assessment of major adverse cardiac events, (4) ≥30 patients, and (5) study population with initial non-diagnostic ECGs and negative biomarkers. RESULTS: Nine studies (N = 1349) formed the data set. The pooled patient population was 52 ± 2 years of age, 51% male, with low to intermediate pretest probability for ACS. Risk factors included 12% diabetes, 42% hypertension, 35% smokers, 29% had hyperlipidemia, and 7% known CAD. ACS was subsequently diagnosed in 10% of patients. The bivariate summary estimate of sensitivity of CTA for ACS diagnosis was 95% (95% CI 88-100) and specificity was 87% (95% CI 83-92), yielding a negative likelihood ratio of 0.06 (95% CI 0-0.14) and positive likelihood ratio of 7.4 (95% CI 4.8-10). The 30-day event rate included no deaths and no additional MIs. CONCLUSION: Coronary CTA demonstrates a high sensitivity and a low negative likelihood ratio of 0.06, and is effective in ruling out the presence of ACS in low to intermediate risk patients presenting to the ED with acute chest pain.
Authors: E M Antman; M Cohen; P J Bernink; C H McCabe; T Horacek; G Papuchis; B Mautner; R Corbalan; D Radley; E Braunwald Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-08-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jeffrey L Anderson; Cynthia D Adams; Elliott M Antman; Charles R Bridges; Robert M Califf; Donald E Casey; William E Chavey; Francis M Fesmire; Judith S Hochman; Thomas N Levin; A Michael Lincoff; Eric D Peterson; Pierre Theroux; Nanette Kass Wenger; R Scott Wright; Sidney C Smith; Alice K Jacobs; Jonathan L Halperin; Sharon A Hunt; Harlan M Krumholz; Frederick G Kushner; Bruce W Lytle; Rick Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-08-06 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Udo Hoffmann; Antonio J Pena; Fabian Moselewski; Maros Ferencik; Suhny Abbara; Ricardo C Cury; Claudia U Chae; John T Nagurney Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: James A Goldstein; Michael J Gallagher; William W O'Neill; Michael A Ross; Brian J O'Neil; Gilbert L Raff Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-02-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Udo Hoffmann; John T Nagurney; Fabian Moselewski; Antonio Pena; Maros Ferencik; Claudia U Chae; Ricardo C Cury; Javed Butler; Suhny Abbara; David F Brown; Alex Manini; John H Nichols; Stephan Achenbach; Thomas J Brady Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-10-30 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: W Lane Duvall; John A Savino; Elliot J Levine; Usman Baber; Jonathan T Lin; Andrew J Einstein; Luke K Hermann; Milena J Henzlova Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Frances M Russell; Christopher L Moore; D Mark Courtney; Christopher Kabrhel; Howard A Smithline; Kristen E Nordenholz; Peter B Richman; Brian J O'Neil; Michael C Plewa; Daren M Beam; Ronald Mastouri; Jeffrey A Kline Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2015-01-22 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Franz von Ziegler; Jan Schenzle; Stephan Schiessl; Martin Greif; Susanne Helbig; Janine Tittus; Christoph Becker; Alexander Becker Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2013-09-13 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Chad B McBride; Michael K Cheezum; Rosco S Gore; Induruwa N Pathirana; Ahmad M Slim; Todd C Villines Journal: Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep Date: 2013-06
Authors: Christina H Liu; Antonio Sastre; Richard Conroy; Belinda Seto; Roderic I Pettigrew Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 3.488