Coronary CT angiography versus conventional cardiac angiography for therapeutic decision making in patients with high likelihood of coronary artery disease

Radiology

Volumn 265, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 385-392

  Moscariello, Antonio ^a,b   Vliegenthart, Rozemarijn ^a,c   Schoepf, U Joseph ^a   Nance, John W ^a   Zwerner, Peter L ^a   Meyer, Mathias ^a,d   Townsend, Jacob C ^a   Fernandes, Valerian ^a,e   Steinberg, Daniel H ^a   Fink, Christian ^d   Oudkerk, Matthijs ^c   Bonomo, Lorenzo ^b   O'Brien, Terrence X ^a,e   Henzler, Thomas ^a,d  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b FONDAZIONE POLICLINICO UNIVERSITARIO A GEMELLI IRCCS   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^e RALPH H JOHNSON VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS SURGERY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PERFORMANCE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 84867903940     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12112426     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Abdulla J, Abildstrom SZ, Gotzsche O, Christensen E, Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C. 64-multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2007;28(24):3042-3050. (Pubitemid 350262259)
2. 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(21):1724-1732.
3. Hamon M, Biondi-Zoccai GG, Malagutti P, et al. Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared with conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48(9):1896-1910. (Pubitemid 44755022)
4. Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008;359(22):2324-2336.
5. von Ballmoos MW, Haring B, Juillerat P, Alkadhi H. Meta-analysis: diagnostic performance of low-radiation-dose coronary computed tomography angiography. Ann Intern Med 2011;154(6):413-420.
6. Gaemperli O, Husmann L, Schepis T, et al. Coronary CT angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging to detect flow-limiting stenoses: a potential gatekeeper for coronary revascularization? Eur Heart J 2009;30(23):2921-2929.
7. Levsky JM, Kim CW, Spevack DM, Travin MI, Tobin JN, Haramati LB. Efficacy of coronary CT angiography: where we are, where we are going, and where we want to be. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009;3(3 Suppl 2):S99-S108.
8. Piers LH, Dikkers R, Willems TP, et al. Computed tomographic angiography or conventional coronary angiography in therapeutic decision-making. Eur Heart J 2008;29(23):2902-2907.
9. 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(2):117-121.
10. Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL, et al. A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 1975;51(4 Suppl):5-40.
11. Patel MR, Dehmer GJ, Hirshfeld JW, et al. ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: a report by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Endorsed by the American Society of Echocardiography, the Heart Failure Society of America, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53(6):530-553.
12. Bongartz G, Golding SJ, Jurik AG, et al. 2004 CT quality criteria. Luxembourg: European Commission, 2004.
13. Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med 2010;362(10):886-895.
14. Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS, et al. 64-slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 2008;94(11):1386-1393.
15. Fleischmann KE, Hunink MG, Kuntz KM, Douglas PS. Exercise echocardiography or exercise SPECT imaging? A meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. JAMA 1998;280(10):913-920. (Pubitemid 28423920)
16. Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Fleischmann KE, Hunink MG. Stress echocardiography, stress single-photon-emission computed tomography and electron beam computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of diagnostic performance. Am Heart J 2007;154(3):415-423. (Pubitemid 47268246)
17. Chow BJ, Abraham A, Wells GA, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and impact of computed tomographic coronary angiography on utilization of invasive coronary angiography. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2(1):16-23.