Coronary artery disease: Diagnostic accuracy of CT coronary angiography-a comparison of high and standard spatial resolution scanning

Radiology

Volumn 271, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 688-694

  Pontone, Gianluca ^a   Bertella, Erika ^a   Mushtaq, Saima ^a   Loguercio, Monica ^a   Cortinovis, Sarah ^a   Baggiano, Andrea ^a   Conte, Edoardo ^a   Annoni, Andrea ^a   Formenti, Alberto ^a   Beltrama, Virginia ^a   Guaricci, Andrea Igoren ^b   Andreini, Daniele ^a,c  

^a CENTRO CARDIOLOGICO MONZINO   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FOGGIA   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTERY LESION; ARTICLE; ATHEROSCLEROTIC PLAQUE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; HIGH RESOLUTION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HIGH SPATIAL RESOLUTION COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INVASIVE PROCEDURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPATIAL RESOLUTION COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY;

ALGORITHMS; ARTIFACTS; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; FEMALE; HUMANS; IOPAMIDOL; MALE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84901650353     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13130909     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents, Mark DB, Berman DS, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT 2010 expert consensus document on coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. Circulation 2010;121(22):2509-2543.
2. 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(4):346-355.
3. Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill W W, Goldstein JA. Diagnostic accuracy of nonin-vasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46(3):552-557.
4. Dewey M, Vavere AL, Arbab-Zadeh A, et al. Patient characteristics as predictors of image quality and diagnostic accuracy of MDCT compared with conventional coronary angiography for detecting coronary artery stenoses: CORE-64 Multicenter International Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194(1):93-102.
5. Leber AW, Becker A, Knez A, et al. Accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography to classify and quantify plaque volumes in the proximal coronary system: a comparative study using intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47(3):672-677.
6. Otsuka M, Bruining N, Van Pelt NC, et al. Quantifcation of coronary plaque by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparison with quantitative intracoronary ultrasound. Invest Radiol 2008;43(5):314-321.
7. Zhang S, Levin DC, Halpern EJ, Fischman D, Savage M, Walinsky P. Accuracy of MDCT in assessing the degree of stenosis caused by calcifed coronary artery plaques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191(6):1676-1683.
8. 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-analy-sis. Heart 2008;94(11):1386-1393.
9. Min JK, Swaminathan RV, Vass M, Gallagher S, Weinsaft J W. High-defnition multide-tector computed tomography for evaluation of coronary artery stents: comparison to standard-defnition 64-detector row computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009;3(4):246-251.
10. Diamond GA, Forrester JS. Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. N Engl J Med 1979;300(24):1350- 1358.
11. Hsieh J, Londt J, Vass M, Li J, Tang X, Oker-lund D. Step-and-shoot data acquisition and reconstruction for cardiac X-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 2006;33(11):4236-4248.
12. Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J. A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys 2007;34(11):4526-4544.
13. 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.
14. Pfederer T, Rudofsky L, Ropers D, et al. Image quality in a low radiation exposure protocol for retrospectively ECG-gated coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roent-genol 2009;192(4):1045-1050.
15. Yamada M, Jinzaki M, Tanami Y, et al. Detection of a coronary artery vessel wall: performance of 0.3 mm fne-cell detector computed tomography-a phantom study. Phys Med Biol 2011;56(16):5235-5247.
16. Geleijns J, Golding S, Menzel HG, Schibilla H. A workshop on quality criteria for computed tomography held in Arhus, Denmark, November 1998. Eur Radiol 2000;10(3):544-545.
17. Rao JN, Scott AJ. A simple method for the analysis of clustered binary data. Biometrics 1992;48(2):577-585.
18. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Cury RC, et al. Predictive value of 16-slice multidetector spiral computed tomography to detect signif-cant obstructive coronary artery disease in patients at high risk for coronary artery disease: patient-versus segment-based analysis. Circulation 2004;110(17):2638-2643.
19. 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 signifcant disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186(6):1659-1668.
20. Vavere AL, Arbab-Zadeh A, Rochitte CE, et al. Coronary artery stenoses: accuracy of 64-detector row CT angiography in segments with mild, moderate, or severe cal-cifcation-a subanalysis of the CORE-64 trial. Radiology 2011;261(1):100-108.
21. Hassan A, Nazir SA, Alkadhi H. Technical challenges of coronary CT angiography: today and tomorrow. Eur J Radiol 2011;79(2): 161-171.
22. Broderick LS, Brooks GN, Kuhlman JE. Anatomic pitfalls of the heart and pericardium. RadioGraphics 2005;25(2):441-453.
23. Tanami Y, Jinzaki M, Yamada M, Imai Y, Segawa K, Kuribayashi S. Improvement of in-stent lumen measurement accuracy with new high-defnition CT in a phantom model: comparison with conventional 64-detector row CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;28(2):337-342.
24. Andreini D, Pontone G, Mushtaq S, et al. Coronary in-stent restenosis: assessment with CT coronary angiography. Radiology 2012;265(2):410-417.
25. Pontone G, Andreini D, Bartorelli AL, et al. A long-term prognostic value of CT angi-ography and exercise ECG in patients with suspected CAD. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6(6):641-650.