Contrast-enhanced 64-section coronary multidetector CT angiography versus conventional coronary angiography for stent assessment.

PURPOSE To prospectively evaluate the accuracy of 64-section computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of stent restenosis, by using conventional coronary angiography as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS The ethics committee granted permission for the study; patients gave written consent. Contrast material-enhanced coronary CT angiography was performed in 53 patients (45 men, eight women; mean age, 54 years +/- 9 [standard deviation]) suspected of having stent restenosis. Coronary CT angiographic findings were compared with conventional coronary angiographic findings. Two physicians analyzed coronary CT angiographic data sets with multiplanar reformatted images and three-dimensional reformations by using a volume-rendering technique and looked for stent detectability, low-attenuation in-stent filling defects, and grades of restenosis. Conventional coronary angiographic results were interpreted by one of several observers in consensus for stent restenosis; they were blinded to coronary CT angiographic data. Statistical software and general estimating equations were used for data analysis. RESULTS One hundred ten stents were identified in 53 patients. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of coronary CT angiography in detection of in-stent restenosis were 96.9%, 88.0%, 77.5%, 98.5%, and 91%, respectively. Coronary CT angiography depicted in-stent low-attenuation filling defects with an accuracy of 91% and negative predictive value of 98.5% (95% confidence interval: 90.9, 99.9). Coronary CT angiography depicted the status of 97 of 107 stents. There was no significant difference between in-stent lumen visibility and stent diameter (P = .104). Coronary CT angiography helped diagnose 15 of 18 stent restenoses with less than 50% narrowing, five of five stent restenoses with 50%-74% narrowing, and nine of nine (100%) stent restenoses with 75% or greater narrowing or total occlusion of the stent lumen. CONCLUSION Coronary CT angiography can depict in-stent low-attenuation filling defects, which appear to be a reliable sign of stent restenosis, and 64-section CT depicts such defects with a high degree of accuracy.

[1]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Noninvasive coronary imaging and assessment of left ventricular function using 16-slice computed tomography. , 2005, The American journal of cardiology.

[2]  P. Serruys,et al.  Clinical and Angiographic Factors Associated With Asymptomatic Restenosis After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2001, Circulation.

[3]  W Rutsch,et al.  Continued benefit of coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty: five-year clinical follow-up of Benestent-I trial. , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  Filippo Cademartiri,et al.  Usefulness of multislice computed tomographic coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. , 2005, The American journal of cardiology.

[5]  P. Serruys,et al.  Angiographic Findings of the Multicenter Randomized Study With the Sirolimus-Eluting Bx Velocity Balloon-Expandable Stent (RAVEL): Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Inhibit Restenosis Irrespective of the Vessel Size , 2002, Circulation.

[6]  P. Teirstein,et al.  A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  H. S. Mueller,et al.  The Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) trial. Phase I findings. , 1985, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  D. Fleischmann Use of high concentration contrast media: principles and rationale-vascular district. , 2003, European journal of radiology.

[9]  W. Heindel,et al.  64- Versus 16-Slice CT Angiography for Coronary Artery Stent Assessment: In Vitro Experience , 2006, Investigative radiology.

[10]  Thomas Flohr,et al.  Flat-panel Detector Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Coronary Artery Stents: Phantom Study in Comparison With 16-Slice Spiral Computed Tomography , 2005, Investigative radiology.

[11]  Rüdiger Blindt,et al.  Coronary Artery Stents in Multislice Computed Tomography: In Vitro Artifact Evaluation , 2004, Investigative radiology.

[12]  K. Bae,et al.  Coronary artery stent patency assessed with in-stent contrast enhancement measured at multi-detector row CT angiography: initial experience. , 2004, Radiology.

[13]  J. Blanc,et al.  Assessment of coronary artery stents by 16 slice computed tomography , 2005, Heart.

[14]  T. Fujii,et al.  Noninvasive assessment of coronary stents in patients by 16-slice computed tomography. , 2006, International journal of cardiology.

[15]  Rainer Raupach,et al.  Assessment of coronary artery stents using 16-slice MDCT angiography: evaluation of a dedicated reconstruction kernel and a noise reduction filter , 2005, European Radiology.

[16]  W. B. Meijboom,et al.  Multidetector CT for visualization of coronary stents. , 2006, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[17]  P. Serruys,et al.  A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  G. Stone,et al.  Angiographic patterns of in-stent restenosis: classification and implications for long-term outcome. , 1999, Circulation.

[19]  Mary E. Russell,et al.  TAXUS I: Six- and Twelve-Month Results From a Randomized, Double-Blind Trial on a Slow-Release Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent for De Novo Coronary Lesions , 2003, Circulation.

[20]  R. Virmani,et al.  Pathology of acute and chronic coronary stenting in humans. , 1999, Circulation.

[21]  I. Meredith,et al.  Intravascular ultrasound assessment of ambiguous coronary lesions. , 2001, Heart, lung & circulation.