OBJECTIVES: To investigate the diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) with prospective electrocardiograph (ECG) gating based on step-and-shoot (SAS), Flash and volume imaging modes. METHODS: We searched the electronic databases PubMed for all published studies regarding CCTA. We used an exact binomial rendition of the bivariate mixed-effects regression model developed for synthesis of diagnostic data. RESULTS: A total of 21,852 segments, 4,851 vessels and 1,375 patients were identified using database searches. Patient-level pooled sensitivity was 0.99 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.00); specificity was 0.88 (CI, 0.85-0.91). The results showed that the sensitivity and specificity for detection of significant stenosis did not differ in the three protocols (P = 0.24). No heterogeneity was found at the patient level for sensitivity (Q = 26.23; P = 0.12; I (2) = 27.56 % [CI, 0.00-67.02 %]) and specificity (Q = 19.54; P = 0.42; I (2) = 2.78 % [CI, 0.00-66.26 %]). CONCLUSIONS: CCTA with prospective ECG gating has similar high diagnostic value to rule out CAD in all three presented modes. KEY POINTS: • The accuracy of CCTA with different prospective ECG gating is similar • CCTA with prospective ECG gating is effective to exclude coronary artery disease • The radiation dose of volume mode increases with higher heart rate.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) with prospective electrocardiograph (ECG) gating based on step-and-shoot (SAS), Flash and volume imaging modes. METHODS: We searched the electronic databases PubMed for all published studies regarding CCTA. We used an exact binomial rendition of the bivariate mixed-effects regression model developed for synthesis of diagnostic data. RESULTS: A total of 21,852 segments, 4,851 vessels and 1,375 patients were identified using database searches. Patient-level pooled sensitivity was 0.99 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.00); specificity was 0.88 (CI, 0.85-0.91). The results showed that the sensitivity and specificity for detection of significant stenosis did not differ in the three protocols (P = 0.24). No heterogeneity was found at the patient level for sensitivity (Q = 26.23; P = 0.12; I (2) = 27.56 % [CI, 0.00-67.02 %]) and specificity (Q = 19.54; P = 0.42; I (2) = 2.78 % [CI, 0.00-66.26 %]). CONCLUSIONS:CCTA with prospective ECG gating has similar high diagnostic value to rule out CAD in all three presented modes. KEY POINTS: • The accuracy of CCTA with different prospective ECG gating is similar • CCTA with prospective ECG gating is effective to exclude coronary artery disease • The radiation dose of volume mode increases with higher heart rate.
Authors: Christian Sohns; Sebastian Kruse; Dirk Vollmann; Lars Lüthje; Marc Dorenkamp; Joachim Seegers; Claudius Jacobshagen; Alexander W Leber; Silvia Obenauer; Gerd Hasenfuss; Markus Zabel Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-12-06 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Piet K Vanhoenacker; Majanka H Heijenbrok-Kal; Ruben Van Heste; Isabel Decramer; Lieven R Van Hoe; William Wijns; M G Myriam Hunink Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: James P Earls; Elise L Berman; Bruce A Urban; Charlene A Curry; Judith L Lane; Robert S Jennings; Colin C McCulloch; Jiang Hsieh; John H Londt Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-01-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Fabian Bamberg; Alexander Becker; Florian Schwarz; Roy P Marcus; Martin Greif; Franz von Ziegler; Ron Blankstein; Udo Hoffmann; Wieland H Sommer; Verena S Hoffmann; Thorsten R C Johnson; Hans-Christoph R Becker; Bernd J Wintersperger; Maximilian F Reiser; Konstantin Nikolaou Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; Jeroen G Lijmer; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Filippo Cademartiri; Ernesto Di Cesare; Marco Francone; Giovanni Ballerini; Guido Ligabue; Erica Maffei; Andrea Romagnoli; Giovanni Maria Argiolas; Vincenzo Russo; Vitaliano Buffa; Riccardo Marano; Maria Guzzetta; Manuel Belgrano; Iacopo Carbone; Luca Macarini; Claudia Borghi; Paolo Di Renzi; Vicenzo Barile; Lucia Patriarca Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2015-02-21 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Filippo Cademartiri; Sara Seitun; Alberto Clemente; Ludovico La Grutta; Patrizia Toia; Giuseppe Runza; Massimo Midiri; Erica Maffei Journal: Cardiovasc Diagn Ther Date: 2017-04
Authors: Matthias Koopmann; Liane Hinrichs; Jan Olligs; Michael Lichtenberg; Lars Eckardt; Dirk Böse; Stefan Möhlenkamp; Johannes Waltenberger; Frank Breuckmann Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 2.175
Authors: Sara Seitun; Cecilia De Lorenzi; Filippo Cademartiri; Angelo Buscaglia; Nicole Travaglio; Manrico Balbi; Gian Paolo Bezante Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-10-14 Impact factor: 3.411