Si Eun Lee1, Kyunghwa Han1, Jin Hur1, Young Jin Kim1, Hye-Jeong Lee1, Yoo Jin Hong1, Dong Jin Im1, Byoung Wook Choi2. 1. Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University, College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University, College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. BCHOI@yuhs.ac.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The application of SYNTAX score II based on coronary CT angiography (CCTA) for selecting further treatment options has not been studied. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic performance of CCTA combined with SYNTAX score II for selecting the revascularization method compared with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) based on 2014 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) guidelines. METHODS: From January-May 2011, 160 patients who underwent both CCTA and ICA within 30 interval days were included. The diagnostic performance of CCTA, CCTA plus CT-SYNTAX score I and CT-SYNTAX score II was analysed using ICA counterparts as references. RESULTS: Overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of CCTA plus CT-SYNTAX I for selecting coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) candidates using ICA plus ICA-SYNTAX I as reference, were 70.6 %, 95.8 %, 66.7 %, 96.5 % and 93.1 %, respectively. The diagnostic performance of CCTA plus CT-SYNTAX II showed improvement with values of 83.3 %, 97.3 %, 71.4 %, 98.6 % and 96.3 %, respectively, using ICA plus ICA-SYNTAX II as reference. CONCLUSIONS: CCTA combined with CT-SYNTAX score II is an accurate method for selecting CABG surgery candidates compared with ICA-SYNTAX score II. KEY POINTS: • SYNTAX plus CCTA can be highly specific for selecting the revascularization method. • SYNTAX II was complemented by including clinical considerations to SYNTAX I. • CCTA plus CT-SYNTAX II is an accurate method for selecting CABG candidates.
OBJECTIVES: The application of SYNTAX score II based on coronary CT angiography (CCTA) for selecting further treatment options has not been studied. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic performance of CCTA combined with SYNTAX score II for selecting the revascularization method compared with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) based on 2014 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) guidelines. METHODS: From January-May 2011, 160 patients who underwent both CCTA and ICA within 30 interval days were included. The diagnostic performance of CCTA, CCTA plus CT-SYNTAX score I and CT-SYNTAX score II was analysed using ICA counterparts as references. RESULTS: Overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of CCTA plus CT-SYNTAX I for selecting coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) candidates using ICA plus ICA-SYNTAX I as reference, were 70.6 %, 95.8 %, 66.7 %, 96.5 % and 93.1 %, respectively. The diagnostic performance of CCTA plus CT-SYNTAX II showed improvement with values of 83.3 %, 97.3 %, 71.4 %, 98.6 % and 96.3 %, respectively, using ICA plus ICA-SYNTAX II as reference. CONCLUSIONS:CCTA combined with CT-SYNTAX score II is an accurate method for selecting CABG surgery candidates compared with ICA-SYNTAX score II. KEY POINTS: • SYNTAX plus CCTA can be highly specific for selecting the revascularization method. • SYNTAX II was complemented by including clinical considerations to SYNTAX I. • CCTA plus CT-SYNTAX II is an accurate method for selecting CABG candidates.
Authors: L David Hillis; Peter K Smith; Jeffrey L Anderson; John A Bittl; Charles R Bridges; John G Byrne; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Verdi J Disesa; Loren F Hiratzka; Adolph M Hutter; Michael E Jessen; Ellen C Keeley; Stephen J Lahey; Richard A Lange; Martin J London; Michael J Mack; Manesh R Patel; John D Puskas; Joseph F Sabik; Ola Selnes; David M Shahian; Jeffrey C Trost; Michael D Winniford Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-11-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Friedrich W Mohr; Marie-Claude Morice; A Pieter Kappetein; Ted E Feldman; Elisabeth Ståhle; Antonio Colombo; Michael J Mack; David R Holmes; Marie-angèle Morel; Nic Van Dyck; Vicki M Houle; Keith D Dawkins; Patrick W Serruys Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-02-23 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Murat Ugur; Mahmut Uluganyan; Gokhan Cicek; Mehmet Bozbay; Ahmet Ekmekci; Bayram Koroglu; Gurkan Karaca; Ahmet Murat; Eyyup Tusun; Ezgi Kalaycioglu; Hüseyin Uyarel; Mehmet Eren Journal: Angiology Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 3.619
Authors: Carlos M Campos; David van Klaveren; Vasim Farooq; Charles A Simonton; Arie-Pieter Kappetein; Joseph F Sabik; Ewout W Steyerberg; Gregg W Stone; Patrick W Serruys Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Antonio Moscariello; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; U Joseph Schoepf; John W Nance; Peter L Zwerner; Mathias Meyer; Jacob C Townsend; Valerian Fernandes; Daniel H Steinberg; Christian Fink; Matthijs Oudkerk; Lorenzo Bonomo; Terrence X O'Brien; Thomas Henzler Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-08-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Eduardo Pozo; Luis Álvarez-Acosta; David Alonso; Pablo Pazos-Lopez; Maria Eduarda Menezes de Siqueira; Adam Jacobi; Jagat Narula; Valentin Fuster; Javier Sanz Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2015-01-06 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Lieuwe H Piers; Riksta Dikkers; Tineke P Willems; Bart J G L de Smet; Matthijs Oudkerk; Felix Zijlstra; René A Tio Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2008-10-14 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Yuxue Wang; Songjiao Wang; Jun Zhang; Maona Zhang; Hong Zhang; Guofu Gong; Min Luo; Teng Wang; Xiaolu Mao Journal: J Int Med Res Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 1.671