Accuracy of 16-slice multi-detector CT to quantify the degree of coronary artery stenosis: assessment of cross-sectional and longitudinal vessel reconstructions.

BACKGROUND Sixteen-slice multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) permits reliable noninvasive detection of significant coronary stenosis based on qualitative visual assessment. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of MDCT to quantify the degree of coronary stenosis as compared to quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) using two different reconstruction methods. METHODS We studied 69 coronary artery lesions from 38 consecutive patients that underwent 16-slice MDCT as a part of research study, which enrolled consecutive subjects scheduled for clinically indicated invasive coronary angiography. Nine coronary artery lesions with motion artifacts, heavily calcified plaques or stents were excluded from the analysis. The degree of stenosis was calculated by two independent readers non-blinded to the location of the stenosis, but blinded to the results of the QCA. MDCT luminal diameters were measured in cross-sectional multi-planar reformatted (CS-MPR) images created perpendicular to the centerline of the vessel and in 5 mm thin-slab maximum intensity projections (MIP) parallel to the long axis of the vessel. Both MDCT methods were compared against QCA. RESULTS The mean degree of stenosis as measured by MDCT was closely correlated to QCA for both methods (CS-MPR versus QCA: 61 +/- 23% versus 64 +/- 29%; r2 = 0.83, p < 0.001 and MIP versus QCA: 64 +/- 22% versus 64 +/- 29%; r2 = 0.84, p < 0.001 for MIP. Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a negative bias of the degree of stenosis of -2.8 +/- 12% using CS-MPR and a minimally positive bias of 0.6 +/- 12% for MIP. In stratified analysis for lesion severity (mild, 0-40%; moderate, 41-70% or severe, > 70%) the agreement between both CS-MPR and MIP was high when compared to QCA (kappa = 0.74 and 0.71, respectively). CONCLUSION Multi-detector spiral CT permits accurate quantitative assessment of the degree of coronary stenosis in selected data sets of sufficient quality using both cross-sectional and longitudinal vessel reconstructions.

[1]  G. Rubin,et al.  Coronary artery: quantitative evaluation of normal diameter determined with electron-beam CT compared with cine coronary angiography initial experience. , 2003, Radiology.

[2]  Pedro A. Lemos,et al.  Reliable Noninvasive Coronary Angiography With Fast Submillimeter Multislice Spiral Computed Tomography , 2002, Circulation.

[3]  Patrick W Serruys,et al.  Improved diagnostic accuracy with 16-row multi-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  Udo Hoffmann,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 , 2004, Circulation.

[5]  M. Budoff,et al.  Effects of window and threshold levels on the accuracy of three-dimensional rendering techniques in coronary artery electron-beam CT angiography. , 2001, Academic radiology.

[6]  Cécile Grandin,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. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  Stephen Schroeder,et al.  Noninvasive detection of coronary lesions using 16-detector multislice spiral computed tomography technology: initial clinical results. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[8]  Heshui Shi,et al.  Noninvasive Coronary Angiography With Multislice Computed Tomography , 2005 .

[9]  Stephen Schroeder,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary imaging using 16-detector slice spiral computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  S. Achenbach,et al.  Comparison of measurement of cross-sectional coronary atherosclerotic plaque and vessel areas by 16-slice multidetector computed tomography versus intravascular ultrasound. , 2004, The American journal of cardiology.

[11]  W. Bautz,et al.  Detection of Coronary Artery Stenoses With Thin-Slice Multi-Detector Row Spiral Computed Tomography and Multiplanar Reconstruction , 2003, Circulation.

[12]  G. Simonetti,et al.  Accuracy of thin-slice computed tomography in the detection of coronary stenoses. , 2004, European heart journal.

[13]  Filippo Cademartiri,et al.  Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[14]  S. Achenbach,et al.  Comparison of the degree of coronary stenoses by multidetector computed tomography versus by quantitative coronary angiography. , 2005, The American journal of cardiology.

[15]  G. Raff,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[16]  Konstantin Nikolaou,et al.  Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.