Literature DB >> 26467105

Accuracy of Computed Tomographic Angiography and Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography-Acquired Myocardial Perfusion Imaging for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease.

Armin Arbab-Zadeh1, Marcelo F Di Carli2, Rodrigo Cerci1, Richard T George1, Marcus Y Chen1, Marc Dewey1, Hiroyuki Niinuma1, Andrea L Vavere1, Aisha Betoko1, Michail Plotkin1, Christopher Cox1, Melvin E Clouse1, Andrew E Arai1, Carlos E Rochitte1, Joao A C Lima1, Jeffrey Brinker1, Julie M Miller1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Establishing the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD) in symptomatic patients allows appropriately allocating preventative measures. Single-photon emission computed tomography (CT)-acquired myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI) is frequently used for the evaluation of CAD, but coronary CT angiography (CTA) has emerged as a valid alternative. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We compared the accuracy of SPECT-MPI and CTA for the diagnosis of CAD in 391 symptomatic patients who were prospectively enrolled in a multicenter study after clinical referral for cardiac catheterization. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of CTA and SPECT-MPI for identifying patients with CAD defined as the presence of ≥1 coronary artery with ≥50% lumen stenosis by quantitative coronary angiography. Sensitivity to identify patients with CAD was greater for CTA than SPECT-MPI (0.92 versus 0.62, respectively; P<0.001), resulting in greater overall accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.91 [95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.94] versus 0.69 [0.64-0.74]; P<0.001). Results were similar in patients without previous history of CAD (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.92 [0.89-0.96] versus 0.67 [0.61-0.73]; P<0.001) and also for the secondary end points of ≥70% stenosis and multivessel disease, as well as subgroups, except for patients with a calcium score of ≥400 and those with high-risk anatomy in whom the overall accuracy was similar because CTA's superior sensitivity was offset by lower specificity in these settings. Radiation doses were 3.9 mSv for CTA and 9.8 for SPECT-MPI (P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: CTA is more accurate than SPECT-MPI for the diagnosis of CAD as defined by conventional angiography and may be underused for this purpose in symptomatic patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00934037.
© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ROC curve; coronary angiography; coronary artery disease; myocardial ischemia; myocardial perfusion imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26467105      PMCID: PMC6604852          DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.115.003533

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1941-9651            Impact factor:   7.792


  13 in total

1.  Multi-vessel disease and CZT SPECT. Comparison with coronary angiography.

Authors:  Nikant Sabharwal; Avijit Lahiri
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  Prediction of multivessel coronary artery disease and candidates for stress-only imaging using multivariable models with myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Yuji Kunita; Kenichi Nakajima; Tomoaki Nakata; Takashi Kudo; Seigo Kinuya
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2022-06-05       Impact factor: 2.258

Review 3.  A Narrative Review of the Classical and Modern Diagnostic Methods of the No-Reflow Phenomenon.

Authors:  Larisa Renata Pantea-Roșan; Simona Gabriela Bungau; Andrei-Flavius Radu; Vlad Alin Pantea; Mădălina Ioana Moisi; Cosmin Mihai Vesa; Tapan Behl; Aurelia Cristina Nechifor; Elena Emilia Babes; Manuela Stoicescu; Daniela Gitea; Diana Carina Iovanovici; Cristiana Bustea
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-08

4.  [Ischemic burden vs. coronary artery morphology : What is crucial for the indication of revascularization?].

Authors:  D Heber; M Hacker
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 5.  SCCT 2021 Expert Consensus Document on Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography: A Report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Jagat Narula; Y Chandrashekhar; Amir Ahmadi; Suhny Abbara; Daniel S Berman; Ron Blankstein; Jonathon Leipsic; David Newby; Edward D Nicol; Koen Nieman; Leslee Shaw; Todd C Villines; Michelle Williams; Harvey S Hecht
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr       Date:  2020-11-20

Review 6.  Imaging Atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Jason M Tarkin; Marc R Dweck; Nicholas R Evans; Richard A P Takx; Adam J Brown; Ahmed Tawakol; Zahi A Fayad; James H F Rudd
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 17.367

Review 7.  Outcomes of non-invasive diagnostic modalities for the detection of coronary artery disease: network meta-analysis of diagnostic randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  George Cm Siontis; Dimitris Mavridis; John P Greenwood; Bernadette Coles; Adriani Nikolakopoulou; Peter Jüni; Georgia Salanti; Stephan Windecker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2018-02-21

8.  Clinical evaluation of new automatic coronary-specific best cardiac phase selection algorithm for single-beat coronary CT angiography.

Authors:  Hui Wang; Lei Xu; Zhanming Fan; Junfu Liang; Zixu Yan; Zhonghua Sun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Peripheral blood circular RNA hsa_circ_0124644 can be used as a diagnostic biomarker of coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Zhenzhou Zhao; Xuejie Li; Chuanyu Gao; Dongdong Jian; Peiyuan Hao; Lixin Rao; Muwei Li
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Impact of spatial characteristics in the left stenotic coronary artery on the hemodynamics and visualization of 3D replica models.

Authors:  Yang Yang; Xin Liu; Yufa Xia; Xin Liu; Wanqing Wu; Huahua Xiong; Heye Zhang; Lin Xu; Kelvin K L Wong; Hanbin Ouyang; Wenhua Huang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.