Literature DB >> 29447342

Diagnosing coronary artery disease after a positive coronary computed tomography angiography: the Dan-NICAD open label, parallel, head to head, randomized controlled diagnostic accuracy trial of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy.

L Nissen1, S Winther2, J Westra2, J A Ejlersen3, C Isaksen4, A Rossi5, N R Holm2, G Urbonaviciene6, L C Gormsen7, L H Madsen1, E H Christiansen2, M Maeng2, L L Knudsen1, L Frost6, L Brix4, H E Bøtker2, S E Petersen5, M Bøttcher1.   

Abstract

Aims: Perfusion scans after coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) may reduce unnecessary invasive coronary angiographies (ICAs). However, the diagnostic accuracy of perfusion scans after primary CCTA is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) against ICA with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients suspected of CAD by CCTA. Methods and results: Included were consecutive patients (1675) referred to CCTA with symptoms of CAD and low/intermediate risk profile. Patients with suspected CAD based on CCTA were randomized 1:1 to CMR or MPS followed by ICA with FFR. Obstructive CAD was defined as FFR ≤ 0.80 or > 90% diameter stenosis by visual assessment. After initial CCTA, 392 patients (23%) were randomized; 197 to CMR and 195 to MPS. Perfusion scans and ICA were completed in 292 patients (CMR 148, MPS 144). Based on the ICA, 117/292 (40%) patients were classified with CAD. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) for CMR were 41%, 95% CI [28-54], 84% [75-91], 62% [45-78], and 68% [58-76], respectively. For the MPS group 36% [24-50], 94% [87-98], 81% [61-93], and 68% [59-76], respectively.
Conclusion: Patients with low/intermediate CAD risk and a positive CCTA scan represent a challenge to perfusion techniques indicated by the low sensitivity of both CMR and MPS with FFR as a reference. The mechanisms underlying this discrepancy need further investigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29447342     DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jex342

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 2047-2404            Impact factor:   6.875


  9 in total

1.  One step closer to quantifying 'clinical likelihood' in pre-test probability.

Authors:  Jonathan R Weir-McCall; Michelle C Williams; Angela Wood
Journal:  Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes       Date:  2022-09-05

Review 2.  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

3.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Waqas Ullah; Sohaib Roomi; Hafez M Abdullah; Maryam Mukhtar; Zain Ali; Ping Ye; Donald C Haas; Vincent M Figueredo
Journal:  Cardiol Res       Date:  2020-05-03

4.  Non-invasive CT-derived fractional flow reserve and static rest and stress CT myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of haemodynamically significant coronary stenosis.

Authors:  Brian S Ko; Jesper J Linde; Abdul-Rahman Ihdayhid; Bjarne L Norgaard; Klaus F Kofoed; Mathias Sørgaard; Daniel Adams; Marcus Crossett; James D Cameron; Sujith K Seneviratne
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2019-07-04       Impact factor: 2.357

5.  Genetic Risk of Coronary Artery Disease, Features of Atherosclerosis, and Coronary Plaque Burden.

Authors:  Morten Krogh Christiansen; Louise Nissen; Simon Winther; Peter Loof Møller; Lars Frost; Jane Kirk Johansen; Henrik Kjærulf Jensen; Daníel Guðbjartsson; Hilma Holm; Kári Stefánsson; Hans Erik Bøtker; Morten Bøttcher; Mette Nyegaard
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-01-25       Impact factor: 5.501

6.  Comparison of quantitative flow ratio and fractional flow reserve with myocardial perfusion scintigraphy and cardiovascular magnetic resonance as reference standard. A Dan-NICAD substudy.

Authors:  Martin Sejr-Hansen; Jelmer Westra; Simon Winther; Shengxian Tu; Louise Nissen; Lars Gormsen; Steffen E Petersen; June Ejlersen; Christin Isaksen; Hans Erik Bøtker; Morten Bøttcher; Evald H Christiansen; Niels Ramsing Holm
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 2.357

7.  Knowledge of Hyperemic Myocardial Blood Flow in Healthy Subjects Helps Identify Myocardial Ischemia in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.

Authors:  Lijuan Lyu; Jichen Pan; Dumin Li; Xinhao Li; Wei Yang; Mei Dong; Chenghu Guo; Peixin Lin; Yeming Han; Yongfeng Liang; Junyan Sun; Dexin Yu; Pengfei Zhang; Mei Zhang
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-02-03

8.  Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with rheumatoid arthritis after initial CT-based diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Annette de Thurah; Ina Trolle Andersen; Andreas Bugge Tinggaard; Anders Hammerich Riis; Josephine Therkildsen; Hans Erik Bøtker; Morthen Bøttcher; Ellen-Margrethe Hauge
Journal:  RMD Open       Date:  2020-01

9.  Sortilin as a Biomarker for Cardiovascular Disease Revisited.

Authors:  Peter Loof Møller; Palle D Rohde; Simon Winther; Peter Breining; Louise Nissen; Anders Nykjaer; Morten Bøttcher; Mette Nyegaard; Mads Kjolby
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-04-16
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.