Limitations of 64-detector-row computed tomography coronary angiography: Calcium and motion but not short experience

Background: Recently, 64-detector-row computed tomography coronary angiography (CTA) has been introduced for the noninvasive diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic capacity and limitations of a newly established CTA service. Material and Methods: In 101 outpatients with suspected coronary artery disease, 64-detector-row CTA (VCT Lightspeed 64; GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, Wisc., USA) was performed before invasive coronary angiography (ICA). The presence of >50% diameter coronary stenosis on CTA was rated by two radiologists recently trained in CTA, and separately by an experienced colleague. Diagnostic performance of CTA was calculated on segment, vessel, and patient levels, using ICA as a reference. Segments with a proximal reference diameter <2 mm or with stents were not analyzed. Results: In 51 of 101 patients and 121 of 1280 segments, ICA detected coronary stenosis. In 274 of 1280 (21%) segments, CTA had non-diagnostic image quality, the main reasons being severe calcifications (49%), motion artifacts associated with high or irregular heart rate (45%), and low contrast opacification (14%). Significantly more women (43%) had non-diagnostic scans compared to men (20%). A heart rate above 60 beats per minute was associated with significantly more non-diagnostic patients (38% vs. 18%). In the 1006 diagnostic segments, CTA had a sensitivity of 78%, specificity of 95%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 54%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 98% for detecting significant coronary stenosis. In 29 patients, CTA was non-diagnostic. In the remaining 72 patients, sensitivity was 100%, specificity 65%, PPV 79%, and NPV 100%. The use of a more experienced CTA reader did not improve diagnostic performance. Conclusion: CTA had a very high negative predictive value, but the number of non-diagnostic scans was high, especially in women. The main limitations were motion artifacts and vessel calcifications, while short experience in CTA did not influence the interpretation.

[1]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Cardiac CT and CT coronary angiography: technology and application , 2008, Heart.

[2]  C. Claussen,et al.  Noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography in an unselected patient collective: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability and coronary calcifications on image quality and diagnostic accuracy. , 2008, European journal of radiology.

[3]  Fuminari Tatsugami,et al.  Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. , 2007, European heart journal.

[4]  Jörg Hausleiter,et al.  Non-invasive coronary computed tomographic angiography for patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the Coronary Angiography by Computed Tomography with the Use of a Submillimeter resolution (CACTUS) trial. , 2007, European heart journal.

[5]  W. B. Meijboom,et al.  Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in women versus men with angina pectoris. , 2007, The American journal of cardiology.

[6]  T. Holland-Letz,et al.  How good are experienced interventional cardiologists at predicting the functional significance of intermediate or equivocal left main coronary artery stenoses? , 2007, International journal of cardiology.

[7]  Konstantin Nikolaou,et al.  Visual and automatic grading of coronary artery stenoses with 64-slice CT angiography in reference to invasive angiography , 2007, European Radiology.

[8]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Gender influence on the diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multislice computed tomography coronary angiography for detection of obstructive coronary artery disease , 2007, Heart.

[9]  Bernhard Meier,et al.  Percutaneous coronary interventions in Europe , 2007, Clinical Research in Cardiology.

[10]  J. Tobis,et al.  Assessment of intermediate severity coronary lesions in the catheterization laboratory. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  Simon Wildermuth,et al.  Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. , 2006, Radiology.

[12]  Konstantin Nikolaou,et al.  Accuracy of 64-MDCT in the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease. , 2006, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  Yasuyuki Suzuki,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography for detecting angiographically significant coronary artery stenosis in an unselected consecutive patient population: comparison with conventional invasive angiography. , 2006, Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society.

[14]  Gabriel P. Krestin,et al.  High-Resolution Spiral Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography in Patients Referred for Diagnostic Conventional Coronary Angiography , 2005, Circulation.

[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]  S. Wildermuth,et al.  Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. , 2005, European heart journal.

[17]  C. Held,et al.  Favourable long term prognosis in stable angina pectoris: an extended follow up of the angina prognosis study in Stockholm (APSIS) , 2005, Heart.

[18]  M. Togni,et al.  Percutaneous coronary interventions in Europe 1992-2001. , 2004, European heart journal.

[19]  M. Togni,et al.  Percutaneous coronary interventions in Europe 1992-2003. , 2004, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[20]  P. J. Ell,et al.  Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy: the evidence , 2003, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[21]  Joseph S Alpert,et al.  ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for exercise testing: summary article. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1997 Exercise Testing Guidelines). , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  Habib Samady,et al.  Comparison between visual assessment and quantitative angiography versus fractional flow reserve for native coronary narrowings of moderate severity. , 2002, The American journal of cardiology.

[23]  M A Hlatky,et al.  American College of Cardiology/Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions Clinical Expert Consensus Document on cardiac catheterization laboratory standards. A report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. , 2001 .

[24]  B. De Bruyne,et al.  Coronary pressure measurement and fractional flow reserve , 1998, Heart.

[25]  R. Frye,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. , 1975, Circulation.

[26]  W. Vach,et al.  Potential impact of myocardial perfusion scintigraphy as gatekeeper for invasive examination and treatment in patients with stable angina pectoris: observational study without post-test referral bias. , 2006, European heart journal.

[27]  C. F. Mädlera,et al.  Non-invasive diagnosis of coronary artery disease by quantitative stress echocardiography: optimal diagnostic models using off-line tissue Doppler in the MYDISE study. , 2003, European heart journal.

[28]  S. Kaul,et al.  Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents Endorsed by the American Heart Association and the , 2022 .

[29]  Cockcroft Dw,et al.  Prediction of Creatinine Clearance from Serum Creatinine , 1976 .