|
|
||||||||
Evidence-based Practice |
1 From the Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging (P.K.V., R.V.H., I.D., L.R.V.H.) and Cardiovascular Center Aalst (I.D., W.W.), OLV Ziekenhuis Aalst, Moorselbaan 164, 9300 Aalst, Belgium; and Program for the Assessment of Radiological Technology, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics and Department of Radiology, Erasmus MC–University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (M.H.H., M.G.M.H.). Received July 14, 2006; revision requested September 18; revision received November 27; final version accepted January 2, 2007. Address correspondence to P.K.V. (e-mail: piet{at}vanhoenacker.be).
Purpose: To review the literature on the diagnostic performance of multidetector computed tomographic (CT) angiography for assessment of symptomatic coronary artery disease, with conventional coronary angiography as the reference standard.
Materials and Methods: A PubMed and manual search of the literature published between January 1998 and May 2006 on use of multidetector CT angiography compared with coronary angiography in patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease was performed. Summary estimates of diagnostic odds ratio, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated. Random-effects models were used to compare the diagnostic performance of four-, 16-, and 64-detector CT angiographic units, and the proportion of nonassessable coronary arterial segments was evaluated.
Results: Fifty-four studies were included in the meta-analysis: 22 studies with four-detector CT angiography, 26 with 16-detector CT angiography, and six with 64-detector CT angiography. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for detecting a greater than 50% stenosis per segment were 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88, 0.97) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.97) for 64-detector CT angiography, 0.83 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.90) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.95, 0.97) for 16-detector CT angiography, and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.88) and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.95) for four-detector CT angiography, respectively. Results of regression analysis indicated that the diagnostic performance significantly improved with the newer generations of multidetector CT scanners (64- and 16-detector vs four-detector units), adjusted for exclusion of nonassessable segments, and contrast agent concentration used (P < .05). Simultaneously, the nonassessable proportion of segments significantly decreased with the newer generations of multidetector CT scanners, adjusted for heart rate, prevalence of significant disease, and mean age.
Conclusion: With the newer generations of multidetector CT scanners, the diagnostic performance for the assessment of coronary artery disease has significantly improved, and the proportion of nonassessable segments has decreased.
Supplemental material:
radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/244/2/419/DC1
radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/244/2/419/DC2
radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/244/2/419/DC3
© RSNA, 2007
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
H. Gouya, O. Varenne, L. Trinquart, E. Touze, O. Vignaux, C. Spaulding, J.-L. Mas, and J.-L. Sablayrolles Coronary Artery Stenosis in High-risk Patients: 64-Section CT and Coronary Angiography--Prospective Study and Analysis of Discordance Radiology, June 22, 2009; (2009) 2522081271. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
S. Achenbach, V. Dilsizian, C. M. Kramer, and W. A. Zoghbi The Year in Coronary Artery Disease J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img., June 1, 2009; 2(6): 774 - 786. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Sarno, I. Decraemer, P. K. Vanhoenacker, B. De Bruyne, M. Hamilos, T. Cuisset, E. Wyffels, J. Bartunek, G. R. Heyndrickx, and W. Wijns On the Inappropriateness of Noninvasive Multidetector Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography to Trigger Coronary Revascularization: A Comparison With Invasive Angiography J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., June 1, 2009; 2(6): 550 - 557. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Pugliese, M. G. M. Hunink, K. Gruszczynska, F. Alberghina, R. Malago, N. van Pelt, N. R. Mollet, F. Cademartiri, A. C. Weustink, W. B. Meijboom, et al. Learning Curve for Coronary CT Angiography: What Constitutes Sufficient Training? Radiology, May 1, 2009; 251(2): 359 - 368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. T. George, A. Arbab-Zadeh, J. M. Miller, K. Kitagawa, H.-J. Chang, D. A. Bluemke, L. Becker, O. Yousuf, J. Texter, A. C. Lardo, et al. Adenosine Stress 64- and 256-Row Detector Computed Tomography Angiography and Perfusion Imaging: A Pilot Study Evaluating the Transmural Extent of Perfusion Abnormalities to Predict Atherosclerosis Causing Myocardial Ischemia Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, May 1, 2009; 2(3): 174 - 182. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Pflederer, L. Rudofsky, D. Ropers, S. Bachmann, M. Marwan, W. G. Daniel, and S. Achenbach Image Quality in a Low Radiation Exposure Protocol for Retrospectively ECG-Gated Coronary CT Angiography Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2009; 192(4): 1045 - 1050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. J. Gibbons, P. A. Araoz, and E. E. Williamson The year in cardiac imaging. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 6, 2009; 53(1): 54 - 70. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. B. Meijboom, M. F.L. Meijs, J. D. Schuijf, M. J. Cramer, N. R. Mollet, C. A.G. van Mieghem, K. Nieman, J. M. van Werkhoven, G. Pundziute, A. C. Weustink, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 16, 2008; 52(25): 2135 - 2144. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. B. Meijer, Y. L. O, J. Geleijns, and L. J. M. Kroft Meta-Analysis of 40- and 64-MDCT Angiography for Assessing Coronary Artery Stenosis Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2008; 191(6): 1667 - 1675. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. D. Dodd, S. Kalva, A. Pena, F. Bamberg, M. D. Shapiro, S. Abbara, R. C. Cury, T. J. Brady, and U. Hoffmann Emergency Cardiac CT for Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome: Qualitative and Quantitative Assessment of Coronary, Pulmonary, and Aortic Image Quality Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2008; 191(3): 870 - 877. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A.-C. Pouleur, J.-B. le Polain de Waroux, J. Kefer, A. Pasquet, J.-L. Vanoverschelde, and B. L. Gerber Direct Comparison of Whole-Heart Navigator-Gated Magnetic Resonance Coronary Angiography and 40- and 64-Slice Multidetector Row Computed Tomography to Detect the Coronary Artery Stenosis in Patients Scheduled for Conventional Coronary Angiography Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, September 1, 2008; 1(2): 114 - 121. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. M. Takakuwa and E. J. Halpern Evaluation of a "Triple Rule-Out" Coronary CT Angiography Protocol: Use of 64-Section CT in Low-to-Moderate Risk Emergency Department Patients Suspected of Having Acute Coronary Syndrome Radiology, August 1, 2008; 248(2): 438 - 446. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. A. Bluemke, S. Achenbach, M. Budoff, T. C. Gerber, B. Gersh, L. D. Hillis, W. G. Hundley, W. J. Manning, B. F. Printz, M. Stuber, et al. Noninvasive Coronary Artery Imaging: Magnetic Resonance Angiography and Multidetector Computed Tomography Angiography: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention of the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and the Councils on Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Disease in the Young Circulation, July 29, 2008; 118(5): 586 - 606. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. D. Schuijf, J. M. van Werkhoven, G. Pundziute, J. W. Jukema, I. Decramer, M. P. Stokkel, P. Dibbets-Schneider, M. J. Schalij, J. H.C. Reiber, E. E. van der Wall, et al. Invasive versus noninvasive evaluation of coronary artery disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img., March 1, 2008; 1(2): 190 - 199. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. D Schuijf and J. J Bax CT angiography: an alternative to nuclear perfusion imaging? Heart, March 1, 2008; 94(3): 255 - 257. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Schroeder, S. Achenbach, F. Bengel, C. Burgstahler, F. Cademartiri, P. de Feyter, R. George, P. Kaufmann, A. F. Kopp, J. Knuuti, et al. Cardiac computed tomography: indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements: Report of a Writing Group deployed by the Working Group Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology Eur. Heart J., February 2, 2008; 29(4): 531 - 556. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||