| Literature DB >> 35911522 |
Maria Emfietzoglou1, Michail C Mavrogiannis1, Athanasios Samaras2, Georgios P Rampidis2, George Giannakoulas2, Polydoros N Kampaktsis3.
Abstract
Cardiac computed tomography (CCT) is now considered a first-line diagnostic test for suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) providing a non-invasive, qualitative, and quantitative assessment of the coronary arteries and pericoronary regions. CCT assesses vascular calcification and coronary lumen narrowing, measures total plaque burden, identifies plaque composition and high-risk plaque features and can even assist with hemodynamic evaluation of coronary lesions. Recent research focuses on computing coronary endothelial shear stress, a potent modulator in the development and progression of atherosclerosis, as well as differentiating an inflammatory from a non-inflammatory pericoronary artery environment using the simple measurement of pericoronary fat attenuation index. In the present review, we discuss the role of the above in the diagnosis of coronary atherosclerosis and the prediction of adverse cardiovascular events. Additionally, we review the current limitations of cardiac computed tomography as an imaging modality and highlight how rapid technological advancements can boost its capacity in predicting cardiovascular risk and guiding clinical decision-making.Entities:
Keywords: adverse coronary events; cardiac computed tomography; computational fluid dynamics; coronary artery calcium score; coronary artery disease; perivascular fat
Year: 2022 PMID: 35911522 PMCID: PMC9334665 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.920119
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
Figure 1Current and emerging roles of cardiac computed tomography in predicting adverse coronary events. Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery disease with cardiac computed tomography (CCT) includes coronary artery calcium score, anatomic assessment to identify stenosis, plaque volume, and high-risk plaque features, hemodynamic assessment using computational fluid dynamics to compute fractional flow reserve (FFR) and endothelial shear stress (ESS), as well as derivation of perivascular fat attenuation index. Perivascular fat attenuation index figure is owned by: Oxford Academic Cardiovascular CT Core Lab and Lab of Inflammation and Cardiometabolic Diseases at NHLBI, published under Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC 2.0). Link to license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/.
Cardiac computed tomography derived parameters: pros, cons, and clinical value.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| CACS | - Low radiation - No contrast - Quick - Inexpensive - Reproducible | - Unclear value of serial CCT assessments - Must consider pre-test probability of CAD | - Good correlation with long-term risk of cardiac events - Incremental predictive value on top of traditional risk factors |
|
| |||
| Stenosis and plaque volume | - Precise evaluation of presence and extent of non-obstructive lesions | - CCTA has moderate to high sensitivity and specificity in lesion severity | - Degree of stenosis correlates well with mortality risk - Severe plaque burden correlates with adverse cardiac outcomes - Plaque progression on serial CCTAs correlates with risk of ACS |
| High-risk plaque features | - Dynamic morphology of plaques not captured - Need to consider additional thrombophilic factors | - Predict plaque rupture/ erosion - Respond well to statin use | |
|
| - Correlates with TCFA and culprit lesions in ACS | ||
|
| - Influenced by contrast concentration, plaque burden, slice thickness, image noise, tube voltage - Challenging distinction of lipid vs. fibrous-rich plaques | -Lower attenuation in ruptured plaques and in ACS compared to stable lesions and stable angina | |
|
| - Good specificity | - Modest sensitivity | - Correlates with TCFA and future cardiac events |
|
| - Micro-calcifications cannot be visualized with CCTA | - Correlates with accelerated CAD progression and culprit plaques in ACS | |
|
| |||
| FFR | -Functional assessment of lesion | - Gray zone; No evidence-based cut-off value | - FFR > 0.75–0.8 indicates hemodynamically significant stenosis - Negative CT-FFR can safely defer invasive angiography |
| CTP | - Identification of of myocardial perfusion defects - Detection of hemodynamically significant stenosis | - Absolute quantification of myocardial blood flow similar to PET - Incremental diagnostic value over CCTA alone and CT-FFR for the identification of hemodynamically significant CAD - Incremental predictive value over CCTA, CT-FFR, or clinical risk factors for the prediction of future major adverse cardiac events | |
| ESS | - Lower accuracy (except if CCTA is fused with intracoronary imaging techniques) | - In native arteries: associated with initiation and progression of atherosclerosis, development of high-risk plaques, need for revascularization, and major adverse events - In stented arteries: associated with neo-intima hyperplasia and neo-atherosclerosis | |
| PVAT | - No data available regarding risk-reduction therapies (e.g., statins) | - Higher FAI associated with: ° CAD ° ACS culprit lesions ° All-cause mortality ° Cardiac mortality | |
CACS, Coronary artery calcium score; CCT, Cardiac computed tomography; CAD, Coronary artery disease; CCTA, Cardiac computed tomography angiography; ACS, Acute coronary syndromes; TCFA, thin cap fibroatheroma; FFR, Fractional flow reserve; CT-FFR, Computed tomography-FFR; CTP, Computed tomography perfusion; PET, Positron emission tomography; ESS, Endothelial shear stress; PVAT, Perivascular adipose tissue; FAI, Fat attenuation index.