PURPOSE: To compare the image quality, evaluability, diagnostic accuracy, and radiation exposure of high-spatial-resolution (HR, 0.23-mm) computed tomographic (CT) coronary angiography with standard spatial resolution (SR, 0.625-mm) 64-section imaging in patients at high risk for coronary artery disease (CAD) by using invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Written informed consent was obtained from all patients, and the study protocol was approved by the institutional ethical committee. Patients at high risk for CAD (n = 184) who were scheduled for ICA were randomly assigned for study with SR (n = 91) or HR (n = 93) coronary CT angiography before they underwent ICA. To compare the two groups, the Student t test or Wilcoxon test were used to evaluate differences in continuous variables. The χ(2) test or Fisher exact test were used, as appropriate, for categorical data. The McNemar test was used to compare the diagnostic performance of coronary CT angiography versus that of ICA in each group. RESULTS:HR coronary CT angiography showed a higher image quality score (3.7 vs 3.4, P < .001) and evaluability (97% vs 92%, P < .002). In a segment-based analysis, HR coronary CT angiography showed a higher specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy in comparison with SR coronary CT angiography (98%, 91%, and 99% vs 95%, 80%, and 95%, respectively; P < .001). Moreover, HR coronary CT angiography showed a better agreement with ICA for calcified plaques compared with SR coronary CT angiography and ICA (83% vs 53%, P < .001). In a patient-based analysis, HR coronary CT angiography showed higher specificity and accuracy compared with SR coronary CT angiography (91% and 98% vs 46% and 92%, respectively; P < .01). No differences in radiation exposure were found between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Improved evaluability and accuracy were seen with HR compared with SR coronary CT angiography of calcified coronary artery lesions, suggesting a potential use for this technology in patients at high risk for CAD.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the image quality, evaluability, diagnostic accuracy, and radiation exposure of high-spatial-resolution (HR, 0.23-mm) computed tomographic (CT) coronary angiography with standard spatial resolution (SR, 0.625-mm) 64-section imaging in patients at high risk for coronary artery disease (CAD) by using invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Written informed consent was obtained from all patients, and the study protocol was approved by the institutional ethical committee. Patients at high risk for CAD (n = 184) who were scheduled for ICA were randomly assigned for study with SR (n = 91) or HR (n = 93) coronary CT angiography before they underwent ICA. To compare the two groups, the Student t test or Wilcoxon test were used to evaluate differences in continuous variables. The χ(2) test or Fisher exact test were used, as appropriate, for categorical data. The McNemar test was used to compare the diagnostic performance of coronary CT angiography versus that of ICA in each group. RESULTS: HR coronary CT angiography showed a higher image quality score (3.7 vs 3.4, P < .001) and evaluability (97% vs 92%, P < .002). In a segment-based analysis, HR coronary CT angiography showed a higher specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy in comparison with SR coronary CT angiography (98%, 91%, and 99% vs 95%, 80%, and 95%, respectively; P < .001). Moreover, HR coronary CT angiography showed a better agreement with ICA for calcified plaques compared with SR coronary CT angiography and ICA (83% vs 53%, P < .001). In a patient-based analysis, HR coronary CT angiography showed higher specificity and accuracy compared with SR coronary CT angiography (91% and 98% vs 46% and 92%, respectively; P < .01). No differences in radiation exposure were found between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Improved evaluability and accuracy were seen with HR compared with SR coronary CT angiography of calcified coronary artery lesions, suggesting a potential use for this technology in patients at high risk for CAD.
Authors: A E Vanrossomme; O F Eker; J-P Thiran; G P Courbebaisse; K Zouaoui Boudjeltia Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-04-30 Impact factor: 3.825