Coronary computed tomography angiography

Current Opinion in Cardiology

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 392-402

  Chang, Su M ^b   Bhatti, Sabha ^a   Nabi, Faisal ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

^b HOUSTON METHODIST HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

appropriate clinical application; coronary artery disease; coronary computed tomography angiography; diagnosis and prognosis; radiation

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; IODINATED CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ATHEROSCLEROTIC PLAQUE; CARDIAC PATIENT; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CORONARY ARTERY ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORONARY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY STENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE SEVERITY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; GATED IMAGING; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IN-STENT RESTENOSIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; IONIZING RADIATION; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION DOSE FRACTIONATION; RADIATION EXPOSURE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ASYMPTOMATIC DISEASES; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; HUMANS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROGNOSIS; RADIATION DOSAGE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 80051798705     PISSN: 02684705     EISSN: 15317080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/HCO.0b013e32834938c6     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med 2010; 362:886-895.
2. Greenland P, Alpert JS, Beller GA, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA guideline for assessment of cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic adults: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2010; 122:e584-e636. Adetailed and expert analysis of the available data documenting absolute and relative benefits and risks of currently available cardiovascular testing/procedures for detection and management of CAD in asymptomatic individuals. Most of the section dedicated to cardiac CT focused on the CACS by noncontrast CT.
3. Wilson SR, Min JK. The potential role for the use of cardiac computed tomography angiography for the acute chest pain patient in the emergency department. J Nucl Cardiol 2011; 18:168-176. An updated review of the current literature for the use of CCTA for patients presenting with acute chest pain.
4. Rybicki FJ, Otero HJ, Steigner ML, et al. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008; 24:535-546.
5. Achenbach S, Marwan M, Schepis T, et al. High-pitch spiral acquisition: A new scan mode for coronary CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009; 3:117-121.
6. Mahesh M, Cody DD. Physics of cardiac imaging with multiple-row detector CT. Radiographics 2007; 27:1495-1509.
7. Roberts WT, Bax JJ, Davies LC. Cardiac CT and CT coronary angiography: Technology and application. Heart 2008; 94:781-792.
8. Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: Comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology 2008; 248:431-437.
9. Pontone G, Andreini D, Bartorelli AL, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography: A comparison between prospective and retrospective electrocardiogram triggering. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54:346-355.
10. Taylor CM, Blum A, Abbara S. Patient preparation and scanning techniques. Radiol Clin North Am 2010; 48:675-686. A current review of patient preparation and scanning techniques for CCTA to obtain optimal image quality while minimizing radiation dose delivered.
11. Mehran R, Aymong ED, Nikolsky E, et al. A simple risk score for prediction of contrast-induced nephropathy after percutaneous coronary intervention: Development and initial validation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44:1393-1399.
12. Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: A comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46:147-154.
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Hunink MG, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary CT angiography by using different generations of multisection scanners: Single-center experience. Radiology 2008; 246:384-393.
16. Gallagher MJ, Ross MA, Raff GL, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography compared with stress nuclear imaging in emergency department low-risk chest pain patients. Ann Emerg Med 2007; 49:125-136.
17. Goldstein JA, Gallagher MJ, O'NeillWW, et al. A randomized controlled trial of multislice coronary computed tomography for evaluation of acute chest pain. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49:863-871.
18. Rubinshtein R, Halon DA, Gaspar T, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice cardiac computed tomographic angiography for diagnosing acute coronary syndromes and predicting clinical outcome in emergency department patients with chest pain of uncertain origin. Circulation 2007; 115:1762-1768.
19. Hoffmann U, Bamberg F, Chae CU, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography for early triage of patients with acute chest pain: The ROMICAT (Rule Out Myocardial Infarction using Computer Assisted Tomography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 53:1642-1650.
20. Hollander JE, Chang AM, Shofer FS, et al. Coronary computed tomographic angiography for rapid discharge of low-risk patients with potential acute coronary syndromes. Ann Emerg Med 2009; 53:295-304.
21. Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64- multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: Results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52:1724-1732.
22. Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008; 359:2324-2336.
23. Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: A prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52:2135-2144.
24. Hamon M, Champ-Rigot L, Morello R, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of in-stent coronary restenosis detection with multislice spiral computed tomography: A meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2008; 18:217-225.
25. Ropers D, Pohle FK, Kuettner A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography in patients after bypass surgery using 64-slice spiral computed tomography with 330-ms gantry rotation. Circulation 2006; 114:2334-2341.
26. Schlosser T, Konorza T, Hunold P, et al. Noninvasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts using 16-detector row computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44:1224-1229.
27. Leber AW, Knez A, Becker A, et al. Visualising noncalcified coronary plaques by CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2005; 21:55-61.
28. Leber AW, Knez A, White CW, et al. Composition of coronary atherosclerotic plaques in patients with acute myocardial infarction and stable angina pectoris determined by contrast-enhanced multislice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2003; 91:714-718.
29. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Nieman K, et al. Noninvasive assessment of plaque morphology and composition in culprit and stable lesions in acute coronary syndrome and stable lesions in stable angina by multidetector computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 47:1655-1662.
30. Motoyama S, Kondo T, Sarai M, et al. Multislice computed tomographic characteristics of coronary lesions in acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50:319-326.
31. Schroeder S, Flohr T, Kopp AF, et al. Accuracy of density measurements within plaques located in artificial coronary arteries by X-ray multislice CT: Results of a phantom study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2001; 25:900-906.
32. Pundziute G, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49:62-70.
33. Min JK, Shaw LJ, Devereux RB, et al. Prognostic value of multidetector coronary computed tomographic angiography for prediction of all-cause mortality. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50:1161-1170.
34. Chow BJ, Wells GA, Chen L, et al. Prognostic value of 64-slice cardiac computed tomography severity of coronary artery disease, coronary atherosclerosis, and left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 55:1017-1028. A large prospective trial of 2076 consecutive patients in whom CTA derived CAD severity, LVEF, and total plaque score were shown to have prognostic and incremental value over routine clinical predictors.
35. Ostrom MP, Gopal A, Ahmadi N, et al. Mortality incidence and the severity of coronary atherosclerosis assessed by computed tomography angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52:1335-1343.
36. Hulten EA, Carbonaro S, Petrillo SP, et al. Prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography angiography: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 57:1237-1247. A systematic review on all major studies confirmed prognostic value of CCTA (18 studies, 9592 patients with a median follow-up of 20 months). Useful positive and negative likelihood ratios are derived to help determine prognosis after the result of CCTA.
37. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007; 298:317-323.
38. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography-an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:2277-2284.
39. Einstein AJ, Moser KW, Thompson RC, et al. Radiation dose to patients from cardiac diagnostic imaging. Circulation 2007; 116:1290-1305.
40. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA 2009; 301:500-507.
41. 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.
42. Jakobs TF, Becker CR, Ohnesorge B, et al. Multislice helical CT of the heart with retrospective ECG gating: Reduction of radiation exposure by ECG-controlled tube current modulation. Eur Radiol 2002; 12:1081-1086.
43. Bischoff B, Hein F, Meyer T, et al. Impact of a reduced tube voltage on CT angiography and radiation dose: Results of the PROTECTION I study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009; 2:940-946.
44. Leipsic J, Labounty TM, Mancini GB, et al. A prospective randomized controlled trial to assess the diagnostic performance of reduced tube voltage for coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 196:801-806. Prospective randomized trial showed that reduced tube voltage results in lower ERD with comparable diagnostic performance.
45. Earls JP, Berman EL, Urban BA, et al. Prospectively gated transverse coronary CT angiography versus retrospectively gated helical technique: Improved image quality and reduced radiation dose. Radiology 2008; 246:742-753.
46. Lell M, Marwan M, Schepis T, et al. Prospectively ECG-triggered highpitch spiral acquisition for coronary CT angiography using dual source CT: Technique and initial experience. Eur Radiol 2009; 19:2576-2583.
47. Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: A catalog. Radiology 2008; 248:254-263.
48. Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM, et al. ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/ NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group, American College of Radiology, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Interventional Radiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48:1475-1497.
49. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for CardiovascularMagnetic Resonance. JAmColl Cardiol 2010; 56:1864-1894. This guideline updates and replaces the 2006 guidelines on the appropriate use of cardiac CTA within the conceptual framework of dynamic appropriate use criteria development. It reflects changes in CCTA utilization in the context of rapid technical advances and new clinical applications. In addition, it is aligned with decision-support tools corresponding to the 2009 appropriate use criteria for radionuclide imaging. Clinical scenarios reflecting the most common and important indications currently in use for CCTA are presented and appropriateness of cardiac CT in these clinical scenarios is discussed and rated.
50. Choi EK, Choi SI, Rivera JJ, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography as a screening tool for the detection of occult coronary artery disease in asymptomatic individuals. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52:357-365.
51. Min JK, Shaw LJ, Berman DS, et al. Costs and clinical outcomes in individuals without known coronary artery disease undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography from an analysis of Medicare category III transaction codes. Am J Cardiol 2008; 102:672-678.