Nicholas D Patchett1, Sumeet Pawar1, Edward J Miller2. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Boston Medical Center and Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA. edward.miller@yale.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is a powerful CAD risk marker when assessed by dedicated calcium scoring CT scan. We assessed diagnostic implications of CAC visible on attenuation correction CT scans (CTAC) from SPECT/CT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). METHODS: Visual presence or absence of CAC was assessed on CTAC in 1047 consecutive patients undergoing SPECT/CT MPI. Accuracy of MPI was assessed in patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography (ICA) within 1 year (n = 109). Outcomes were identified by retrospective chart review. RESULTS: Prevalence of true positive SPECT/CT MPI studies was greater among patients with CAC on CTAC (70% vs 16%; p < .001); prevalence of false positive studies was greater among those without (68% vs 15%; p < .001). PPV of MPI was 0.82 in patients with CAC, but only 0.19 in those without. Within median follow-up of 27.7 months, patients with CAC had higher all-cause mortality (6% vs 0.4%; p < .001), more late revascularizations (8% vs 0.4%; p < .001), and more MI (5% vs 0.2%; p < .001). Hazard ratio for all-cause mortality, MI, or late revascularization was 22.7 (p < .001) for patients with CAC vs those without. CONCLUSIONS: Visual assessment of CAC on CTAC should be performed during SPECT/CT MPI because it affects diagnostic certainty and may improve risk stratification.
BACKGROUND: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is a powerful CAD risk marker when assessed by dedicated calcium scoring CT scan. We assessed diagnostic implications of CAC visible on attenuation correction CT scans (CTAC) from SPECT/CT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). METHODS: Visual presence or absence of CAC was assessed on CTAC in 1047 consecutive patients undergoing SPECT/CT MPI. Accuracy of MPI was assessed in patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography (ICA) within 1 year (n = 109). Outcomes were identified by retrospective chart review. RESULTS: Prevalence of true positive SPECT/CT MPI studies was greater among patients with CAC on CTAC (70% vs 16%; p < .001); prevalence of false positive studies was greater among those without (68% vs 15%; p < .001). PPV of MPI was 0.82 in patients with CAC, but only 0.19 in those without. Within median follow-up of 27.7 months, patients with CAC had higher all-cause mortality (6% vs 0.4%; p < .001), more late revascularizations (8% vs 0.4%; p < .001), and more MI (5% vs 0.2%; p < .001). Hazard ratio for all-cause mortality, MI, or late revascularization was 22.7 (p < .001) for patients with CAC vs those without. CONCLUSIONS: Visual assessment of CAC on CTAC should be performed during SPECT/CT MPI because it affects diagnostic certainty and may improve risk stratification.
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Todd C Villines; Edward A Hulten; Leslee J Shaw; Manju Goyal; Allison Dunning; Stephan Achenbach; Mouaz Al-Mallah; Daniel S Berman; Matthew J Budoff; Filippo Cademartiri; Tracy Q Callister; Hyuk-Jae Chang; Victor Y Cheng; Kavitha Chinnaiyan; Benjamin J W Chow; Augustin Delago; Martin Hadamitzky; Jörg Hausleiter; Philipp Kaufmann; Fay Y Lin; Erica Maffei; Gilbert L Raff; James K Min Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: James K Min; Allison Dunning; Fay Y Lin; Stephan Achenbach; Mouaz Al-Mallah; Matthew J Budoff; Filippo Cademartiri; Tracy Q Callister; Hyuk-Jae Chang; Victor Cheng; Kavitha Chinnaiyan; Benjamin J W Chow; Augustin Delago; Martin Hadamitzky; Joerg Hausleiter; Philipp Kaufmann; Erica Maffei; Gilbert Raff; Leslee J Shaw; Todd Villines; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-08-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Mohamed Mouden; Jan Paul Ottervanger; Jorik R Timmer; Stoffer Reiffers; Ad H J Oostdijk; Siert Knollema; Pieter L Jager Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2013-12-07 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Andrew J Einstein; Lynne L Johnson; Sabahat Bokhari; Jessica Son; Randall C Thompson; Timothy M Bateman; Sean W Hayes; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-11-30 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Ilias Mylonas; Mustapha Kazmi; Lyanne Fuller; Robert A deKemp; Yeung Yam; Li Chen; Rob S Beanlands; Benjamin J W Chow Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-04-17 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Sadhana Jackson; Richard T George; Martin A Lodge; Anna Piotrowski; Richard L Wahl; Sachin K Gujar; Stuart A Grossman Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2017-03-17 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Magdalena M Dobrolinska; Sergiy V Lazarenko; Friso M van der Zant; Lonneke Does; Niels van der Werf; Niek H J Prakken; Marcel J W Greuter; Riemer H J A Slart; Remco J J Knol Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Cvetan Trpkov; Alexei Savtchenko; Zhiying Liang; Patrick Feng; Danielle A Southern; Stephen B Wilton; Matthew T James; Erin Feil; Ilias Mylonas; Robert J H Miller Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Date: 2021-06-19