Coronary arteries: Diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography - Meta-analysis

Radiology

Volumn 245, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 720-731

  Hamon, Michèle ^a   Morello, Rémy ^a   Riddell, John W ^a   Hamon, Martial ^a  

^a CAEN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ANGIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; META ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPIRAL COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; HUMANS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, SPIRAL COMPUTED;

EID: 36248999527     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2453061899     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Thom T, Haase N, Rosamond W, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics - 2006 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation 2006;113(6): e85-e151. [Published corrections appear in Circulation 2006;113(14):e696, Circulation 2006;114(23):e630.]
2. Agostoni P, Biondi-Zoccai G, de Benedictis ML, et al. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures: systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:349-356.
3. Whiting P, Harbord R, Kleijnen J. No role for quality scores in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005; 5:19. http://www.biomedcentral.com /1471-2288/5/19. Published May 26, 2005. Accessed October 15, 2006.
4. Glas AS, Lijmer JG, Prins MH, Bonsel GJ, Bossuyt PM. The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:1129-1135.
5. Deville WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, et al. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol 2002;2:9. http://www.biomedcentral.com /1471-2288/2/9. Published July 3, 2002. Accessed October 15, 2006.
6. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B, Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 1993;12:1293-1316.
7. Walter SD. Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med 2002;21:1237-1256.
8. Lijmer JG, Bossuyt PM, Heisterkamp SH. Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Stat Med 2002;21:1525-1537.
9. Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal Web site. http://biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/6/31. Published July 12, 2006. Accessed October 20, 2006.
10. Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PMT, de Feyter PJ. Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2002;106:2051-2054.
11. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Cury R, et al. Predictive value of 16-slice multidetector spiral computed tomography to detect significant obstructive coronary artery disease in patients at high risk for coronary artery disease. Patient- versus segment-based analysis. Circulation 2004;110:2638-2643.
12. Kuettner A, Trabold T, Schroeder S, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary lesions using 16-detector multislice computed tomography technology. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1230-1237.
13. Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D'Eliseo A, et al. Accuracy of thin-slice computed tomography in the detection of coronary stenoses. Eur Heart J 2004;25:1043-1048.
14. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Nieman K, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43: 2265-2270.
15. Cademartiri F, Runza G, Marano R, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 16-row multislice CT angiography in the evaluation of coronary segments. Radiol Med 2005;109:91-97.
16. Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Schmitz BL, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed angiography. JAMA 2005; 293:2471-2478.
17. Kaiser C, Bremerich J, Haller S, et al. Limited diagnostic yield of non-invasive coronary angiography by 16-slice multi-detector spiral computed tomography in routine patients referred for evaluation of coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2005;26:1987-1992.
18. Kuettner A, Beck T, Kettering K, et al. Image quality and diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive coronary imaging with 16 detector slice spiral computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. Heart 2005;91:938-941.
19. Kuettner A, Beck T, Drosch T, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive coronary imaging using 16-dectector slice spiral computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:123-127.
20. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Krestin GP, et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy with 16-row multi-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45: 128-132.
21. Morgan-Hugues GJ, Roobottom CA, Owens PE, Marshall AJ. Highly accurate coronary angiography with submillmeter, 16 slice computed tomography. Heart 2005;91:308-313.
22. Probst C, Kovacs A, Schmitz C, Schiller W, Schild H, Welz A. Quantification of coronary artery stenosis with 16-slice MSCT in patients before CABG surgery: comparison to standard invasive coronary angiography. Heart Surg Forum 2005;8:E42-E46.
23. Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Liesbeth PS, et al. Noninvasive coronary imaging and assessment of left ventricular function using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2005;95: 571-574.
24. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Pohle FK, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenosis using multi-detector CT with 16 x 0.75 collimation and 375 ms rotation. Eur Heart J 2005;26: 1978-1986.
25. Kefer J, Coche E, Legros G, et al. Head-to-head comparison of three-dimensional navigator-gated magnetic resonance imaging and 16-slice computed tomography to detect coronary artery stenosis in patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:92-100.
26. Moon JY, Chung N, Choi BW, et al. The utility of multi-detector row spiral CT for detection of coronary artery stenoses. Yonsei Med J 2005;46:86-94.
27. Manghat NE, Morgan-Hugues GJ, Broadley AJ, et al. 16-Detector row computed tomographic coronary angiography in patients undergoing evaluation for aortic valve replacement: comparison with catheter angiography. Clinical Radiol 2006;61:749-757.
28. Ghersin E, Limanovich D, Dragn R, et al. 16-MDCT coronary angiography versus invasive coronary angiography in acute chest pain syndrome: a blinded prospective study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:177-184.
29. Dewey M, Teige F, Schnapauff D, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary artery stenoses with multislice computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:407-415.
30. Rodevand O, Hogalmen G, Gudim LP, Intrebo T, Molstad P, Vandvik PO. Limited usefulness of non-invasive coronary angiography with 16-detector multislice computer tomography at a community hospital. Scand Cardiovasc J 2006;40:76-82.
31. Reant P, Brunot S, Lalitte S, et al. Predictive value of noninvasive coronary angiography with multidetector computed tomography to detect significant coronary stenosis before valve surgery. Am J Cardiol 2006;97:1506-1510.
32. Nikolaou K, Rist C, Wintersperger BJ, et al. Clinical value of MDCT in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with a low pretest likelihood of significant disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:1659-1668.
33. Garcia LJ, Lessick J, Hoffman MHK, et al. CATSCAN Study Investigators. Accuracy of 16-row multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery disease. JAMA 2006;296:403-411.
34. Leber AW, Knez A, Von Ziegler F, et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46:147-154.
35. Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 2005;26:1482-1487.
36. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem C, et al. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 2005;112: 2318-2323.
37. Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Runza G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Radiol 2005;16:575-582.
38. Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill WW, Goldstein JA. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:552-557.
39. Schuijf JD, Pundziute G, Jukema JW, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multislice computed tomography in the non-invasive evaluation of significant coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 2006;98:145-148.
40. Ropers D, Rixe J, Anders K, et al. Usefulness of multidetector row spiral computed tomography with 64-x 0.6-mm collimation and 330-ms rotation for the noninvasive detection of significant coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol 2006;97:343-348.
41. Ehara M, Surmely JF, Kawai M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography for detecting angiographically significant coronary artery stenosis in an unselected consecutive patient population: comparison with conventional invasive angiography. Circ J 2006;70:564-571.
42. Nikolaou K, Knez A, Rist C, et al. Accuracy of 64-MDCT in the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187:111-117.
43. Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, Van Mieghem CAG, et al. Pre-operative computed tomography coronary angiography to detect significant coronary artery disease in patients referred for cardiac valve surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:1658-1665.
44. Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol 2006;16: 2739-2749.
45. Mühlenbruch G, Seyfarth T, Soo C, Pregalathan N, Mahnken AH. Diagnostic value of 64-slice multi-detector row cardiac CTA in symptomatic patients. Eur Radiol 2007;17:603-609. http: //www.springerlink.com. Published September 29, 2006. Accessed September 29, 2006.
46. Plass A, Grünenfelder J, Leschka S, et al. Coronary artery imaging with 64-slice computed tomography from cardiac surgical perspective. Eur J Cardiothoracic Surg 2006;30: 109-116.
47. Nieman K, Rensing BJ, van Geuns RJ, et al. Non-invasive coronary angiography with multislice spiral computed tomography: impact of heart rate. Heart 2002;88:470-474.
48. Betsou S, Efstathopoulos EP, Katritsis D, Faulkner K, Panayiotakis G. Patient radiation doses during cardiac catheterization procedures. Br J Radiol 1998;71:634-639.
49. Hunold P, Vogt FM, Schmermund A, et al. Radiation exposure during cardiac CT: effective doses at multi-detector row CT and electron-beam CT. Radiology 2003;226:145-152.
50. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 2006; 113:1305-1310.