Coronary computed tomography angiography for the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy: a meta-analysis of prospective trials.

OBJECTIVES This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for detecting cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) in comparison with conventional coronary angiography (CCAG) alone or with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). BACKGROUND CAV limits long-term survival after heart transplantation, and screening for CAV is performed on annual basis. CCTA is currently not recommended for CAV screening due to the limited accuracy reported by early studies. Technological advances, however, might have resulted in improved test performance and might justify re-evaluation of this recommendation. METHODS A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase for all prospective trials assessing CAV using CCTA was performed using a standard approach for meta-analysis for diagnostic test and a bivariate analysis. RESULTS Thirteen studies evaluating 615 patients (mean age 52 years, 83% male) and 9,481 segments fulfilled inclusion criteria. Patient-based analyses comparing CCTA versus CCAG for the detection of any CAV (> luminal irregularities) and significant CAV (stenosis ≥50%), showed mean weighted sensitivities of 97% and 94%, specificities of 81% and 92%, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97% and 99%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 78% and 67%, and diagnostic accuracies of 88% and 94%, respectively. There was a strong trend toward improved sensitivity (97% vs. 91%, p = 0.06) and NPV (99% vs. 97%, p = 0.06) to detect significant CAV with 64-slice compared with 16-slice CCTA. A patient-based analysis of 64-slice CCTA versus IVUS showed a mean weighted sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 75% to detect CAV (intimal thickening >0.5 mm), whereas the PPV and NPV were 93% and 50%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS CCTA using currently available technology is a reliable noninvasive imaging alternative to coronary angiography with an excellent sensitivity, specificity, and NPV for the detection of CAV.

[1]  J. Paul,et al.  Coronary Stenosis Detection by 16-Slice Computed Tomography in Heart Transplant Patients: Comparison With Conventional Angiography and Impact on Clinical Management , 2005 .

[2]  S. Hunt,et al.  Transplant coronary artery disease: histopathologic correlations with angiographic morphology. , 1991, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  S. Iyengar,et al.  Detection of coronary artery disease in orthotopic heart transplant recipients with 64-detector row computed tomography angiography. , 2006, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[4]  T. Brady,et al.  Computed tomography imaging of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. , 2012, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[5]  H. Valantine.  Cardiac allograft vasculopathy after heart transplantation: risk factors and management. , 2004, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[6]  J. Remy,et al.  Reduced-dose low-voltage chest CT angiography with Sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction versus standard-dose filtered back projection. , 2013, Radiology.

[7]  I. Jang,et al.  Evaluation of coronary allograft vasculopathy using multi-detector row computed tomography: a systematic review. , 2012, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[8]  Josef Stehlik,et al.  The Registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: 29th official adult heart transplant report--2012. , 2012, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[9]  Clive Lewis,et al.  The International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients. , 2010, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[10]  A. Pavie,et al.  Multislice computed tomography to rule out coronary allograft vasculopathy in heart transplant patients. , 2012, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[11]  A. Stadler,et al.  Detection of high-grade stenoses with multislice computed tomography in heart transplant patients. , 2008, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[12]  R. Starling,et al.  International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation working formulation of a standardized nomenclature for cardiac allograft vasculopathy-2010. , 2010, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[13]  Johannes B Reitsma,et al.  Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[14]  L. Merello,et al.  Prevalence of cardiac allograft vasculopathy assessed with coronary angiography versus coronary vascular ultrasound and virtual histology. , 2011, Transplantation proceedings.

[15]  J. Farmer,et al.  Insensitivity of noninvasive tests to detect coronary artery vasculopathy after heart transplant. , 1991, The American journal of cardiology.

[16]  M. Reiser,et al.  Detection of significant coronary artery stenosis with 64-slice computed tomography in heart transplant recipients: a comparative study with conventional coronary angiography , 2008, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[17]  C. Becker,et al.  Detection of significant coronary artery stenosis with cardiac dual‐source computed tomography angiography in heart transplant recipients , 2012, Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation.

[18]  E. Tuzcu,et al.  Impact of intravascular ultrasound in understanding transplant coronary artery disease. , 1999, Current opinion in cardiology.

[19]  J. Paul,et al.  Heart Transplant Patient Outcomes: 5-Year Mean Follow-Up by Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography , 2011, Transplantation.

[20]  K. Otsuka,et al.  Evaluation of cardiac allograft vasculopathy by multidetector computed tomography and whole-heart magnetic resonance coronary angiography. , 2010, Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society.

[21]  M. Mehra,et al.  Presence of severe intimal thickening by intravascular ultrasonography predicts cardiac events in cardiac allograft vasculopathy. , 1995, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[22]  M. Billingham.  Histopathology of graft coronary disease. , 1992, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[23]  G. Bastarrika,et al.  Systolic prospectively ECG-triggered dual-source CT angiography for evaluation of the coronary arteries in heart transplant recipients , 2011, European Radiology.

[24]  E. Tuzcu,et al.  Everolimus for the prevention of allograft rejection and vasculopathy in cardiac-transplant recipients. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  K. Kodama,et al.  Coronary computed tomography angiography using ultra-low-dose contrast media: radiation dose and image quality , 2013, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[26]  R Erbel,et al.  The safety of intracoronary ultrasound. A multicenter survey of 2207 examinations. , 1995, Circulation.

[27]  S. Achenbach,et al.  Comparison of dual source computed tomography versus intravascular ultrasound for evaluation of coronary arteries at least one year after cardiac transplantation. , 2009, The American journal of cardiology.

[28]  A. Kopp,et al.  The challenge to detect heart transplant rejection and transplant vasculopathy non-invasively - a pilot study , 2009, Journal of cardiothoracic surgery.

[29]  N. Banner,et al.  Cardiac allograft vasculopathy after heart transplantation: electrocardiographically gated cardiac CT angiography for assessment. , 2013, Radiology.

[30]  L. Miller,et al.  Heart transplant coronary artery disease detected by coronary angiography: a multiinstitutional study of preoperative donor and recipient risk factors. Cardiac Transplant Research Database. , 1998, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[31]  Miller Lw,et al.  Necropsy versus angiography: how accurate is angiography? , 1992 .

[32]  J. Castellano,et al.  Dual-Source CT Coronary Angiogram in Heart Transplant Recipients in Comparison With Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography for Detection of Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy , 2009, Transplantation.

[33]  Roger M Harbord,et al.  A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. , 2007, Biostatistics.

[34]  C. Kȩpka,et al.  Usefulness of dual-source computed tomography for the evaluation of coronary arteries in heart transplant recipients. , 2012, Kardiologia polska.

[35]  M. Weis,et al.  Cardiac allograft vasculopathy: recent developments. , 2008, Circulation.

[36]  Gustavo Rincon,et al.  Lumen Loss in Transplant Coronary Artery Disease Is a Biphasic Process Involving Early Intimal Thickening and Late Constrictive Remodeling Results From a 5-Year Serial Intravascular Ultrasound Study , 2001 .

[37]  Shawn A. Gregory,et al.  Comparison of sixty-four-slice multidetector computed tomographic coronary angiography to coronary angiography with intravascular ultrasound for the detection of transplant vasculopathy. , 2006, The American journal of cardiology.

[38]  D. Berman,et al.  Coronary computed tomographic angiography as a gatekeeper to invasive diagnostic and surgical procedures: results from the multicenter CONFIRM (Coronary CT Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: an International Multicenter) registry. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[39]  Ó. Cano,et al.  Multislice CT in graft vascular disease. A pilot study. , 2006, Transplantation proceedings.

[40]  J. Blasco,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of 64-slice computed tomography vs. cardiac catheterization to rule out coronary artery disease before non-coronary cardiovascular surgery. , 2013, European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging.

[41]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  BMC Medical Research Methodology , 2002 .

[42]  K. Bae,et al.  Multi-detector row computed tomographic angiography in pediatric heart transplant recipients: Initial observations , 2004, Transplantation.

[43]  J. C. Houwelingen,et al.  Bivariate Random Effects Meta-Analysis of ROC Curves , 2008, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[44]  L E Moses,et al.  Estimating Diagnostic Accuracy from Multiple Conflicting Reports , 1993, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[45]  Marco Valgimigli,et al.  Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared with conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[46]  Mario J. Garcia,et al.  Detection of transplant coronary artery disease using multidetector computed tomography with adaptative multisegment reconstruction. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[47]  Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy: Coronary Computed Tomography and Virtual Histology Assessment , 2010 .