Satoru Kishi1, Tiago A Magalhães2, Rodrigo J Cerci1, Matthew B Matheson3, Andrea Vavere1, Yutaka Tanami4, Pieter H Kitslaar5, Richard T George1, Jeffrey Brinker1, Julie M Miller1, Melvin E Clouse6, Pedro A Lemos7, Hiroyuki Niinuma8, Johan H C Reiber5, Carlos E Rochitte7, Frank J Rybicki9, Marcelo F Di Carli10, Christopher Cox3, Joao A C Lima1, Armin Arbab-Zadeh11. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Catholic University of Paraná (PUC-PR), Brazil. 3. Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan. 5. Division of Image Processing, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center / Medis Medical Imaging Systems, Leiden, The Netherlands. 6. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Heart Institute (InCor), University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil. 8. Division of Cardiology, St. Luke's International Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 9. The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and the Department of Radiology, The University of Ottawa Faculty of Medicine, Ottawa, Canada. 10. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. 11. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: azadeh1@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Total atherosclerotic plaque burden assessment by CT angiography (CTA) is a promising tool for diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease (CAD) but its validation is restricted to small clinical studies. We tested the feasibility of semi-automatically derived coronary atheroma burden assessment for identifying patients with hemodynamically significant CAD in a large cohort of patients with heterogenous characteristics. METHODS: This study focused on the CTA component of the CORE320 study population. A semi-automated contour detection algorithm quantified total coronary atheroma volume defined as the difference between vessel and lumen volume. Percent atheroma volume (PAV = [total atheroma volume/total vessel volume] × 100) was the primary metric for assessment (n = 374). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) determined the diagnostic accuracy for identifying patients with hemodynamically significant CAD defined as ≥50% stenosis by quantitative coronary angiography and associated myocardial perfusion abnormality by SPECT. RESULTS: Of 374 patients, 139 (37%) had hemodynamically significant CAD. The AUC for PAV was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.83) compared with 0.84 [0.79-0.88] by standard expert CTA interpretation (p = 0.02). Accuracy for both CTA (0.91 [0.87, 0.96]) and PAV (0.86 [0.81-0.91]) increased after excluding patients with history of CAD (p < 0.01 for both). Bland-Altman analysis revealed good agreement between two observers (bias of 280.2 mm(3) [161.8, 398.7]). CONCLUSIONS: A semi-automatically derived index of total coronary atheroma volume yields good accuracy for identifying patients with hemodynamically significant CAD, though marginally inferior to CTA expert reading. These results convey promise for rapid, reliable evaluation of clinically relevant CAD.
BACKGROUND: Total atherosclerotic plaque burden assessment by CT angiography (CTA) is a promising tool for diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease (CAD) but its validation is restricted to small clinical studies. We tested the feasibility of semi-automatically derived coronary atheroma burden assessment for identifying patients with hemodynamically significant CAD in a large cohort of patients with heterogenous characteristics. METHODS: This study focused on the CTA component of the CORE320 study population. A semi-automated contour detection algorithm quantified total coronary atheroma volume defined as the difference between vessel and lumen volume. Percent atheroma volume (PAV = [total atheroma volume/total vessel volume] × 100) was the primary metric for assessment (n = 374). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) determined the diagnostic accuracy for identifying patients with hemodynamically significant CAD defined as ≥50% stenosis by quantitative coronary angiography and associated myocardial perfusion abnormality by SPECT. RESULTS: Of 374 patients, 139 (37%) had hemodynamically significant CAD. The AUC for PAV was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.83) compared with 0.84 [0.79-0.88] by standard expert CTA interpretation (p = 0.02). Accuracy for both CTA (0.91 [0.87, 0.96]) and PAV (0.86 [0.81-0.91]) increased after excluding patients with history of CAD (p < 0.01 for both). Bland-Altman analysis revealed good agreement between two observers (bias of 280.2 mm(3) [161.8, 398.7]). CONCLUSIONS: A semi-automatically derived index of total coronary atheroma volume yields good accuracy for identifying patients with hemodynamically significant CAD, though marginally inferior to CTA expert reading. These results convey promise for rapid, reliable evaluation of clinically relevant CAD.
Authors: Andrea L Vavere; Gregory G Simon; Richard T George; Carlos E Rochitte; Andrew E Arai; Julie M Miller; Marcello Di Carli; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Armin A Zadeh; Marc Dewey; Hiroyuki Niinuma; Roger Laham; Frank J Rybicki; Joanne D Schuijf; Narinder Paul; John Hoe; Sachio Kuribyashi; Hajime Sakuma; Cesar Nomura; Tan Swee Yaw; Klaus F Kofoed; Kunihiro Yoshioka; Melvin E Clouse; Jeffrey Brinker; Christopher Cox; Joao A C Lima Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2011-11-12
Authors: K Lance Gould; Nils P Johnson; Timothy M Bateman; Rob S Beanlands; Frank M Bengel; Robert Bober; Paolo G Camici; Manuel D Cerqueira; Benjamin J W Chow; Marcelo F Di Carli; Sharmila Dorbala; Henry Gewirtz; Robert J Gropler; Philipp A Kaufmann; Paul Knaapen; Juhani Knuuti; Michael E Merhige; K Peter Rentrop; Terrence D Ruddy; Heinrich R Schelbert; Thomas H Schindler; Markus Schwaiger; Stefano Sdringola; John Vitarello; Kim A Williams; Donald Gordon; Vasken Dilsizian; Jagat Narula Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Stella-Lida Papadopoulou; Hector M Garcia-Garcia; Alexia Rossi; Chrysafios Girasis; Anoeshka S Dharampal; Pieter H Kitslaar; Gabriel P Krestin; Pim J de Feyter Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-12-07 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Christopher Herzog; J Matthias Kerl; Salvatore De Rosa; Tuna Tekin; Eike Boehme; Sven Liem; Miriam Scheuchenzuber; He-Ri Kim; Ralf W Bauer; Justin R Silverman; Peter L Zwerner; Hanns Ackermann; Thomas J Vogl; U Joseph Schoepf Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2013-04-17 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Richard T George; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Rodrigo J Cerci; Andrea L Vavere; Kakuya Kitagawa; Marc Dewey; Carlos E Rochitte; Andrew E Arai; Narinder Paul; Frank J Rybicki; Albert C Lardo; Melvin E Clouse; Joao A C Lima Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: James K Min; Jonathon Leipsic; Michael J Pencina; Daniel S Berman; Bon-Kwon Koo; Carlos van Mieghem; Andrejs Erglis; Fay Y Lin; Allison M Dunning; Patricia Apruzzese; Matthew J Budoff; Jason H Cole; Farouc A Jaffer; Martin B Leon; Jennifer Malpeso; G B John Mancini; Seung-Jung Park; Robert S Schwartz; Leslee J Shaw; Laura Mauri Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-09-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Axel Schmermund; Joachim Eckert; Marco Schmidt; Annett Magedanz; Thomas Voigtländer Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2018-07-04 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Mallory S Lo-Kioeng-Shioe; Andrea L Vavere; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Joanne D Schuijf; Carlos E Rochitte; Marcus Y Chen; Matthias Rief; Klaus F Kofoed; Melvin E Clouse; Arthur J Scholte; Julie M Miller; Aisha Betoko; Michael J Blaha; Christopher Cox; Jaap W Deckers; Joao A C Lima Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-03-19 Impact factor: 5.501