Abstract
Objective
To prospectively compare the accuracy of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) for stenosis detection using composite findings from both tests as an enhanced reference standard.
Methods
One hundred thirteen patients underwent CCTA and CCA. Per-segment and per-patient accuracy of CCTA compared with initial CCA interpretation were determined. Angiographers were then unblinded to the CCTA results and re-evaluation of the CCA studies was performed with knowledge of CCTA findings, which was used as an enhanced reference standard to compare the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA versus CCA.
Results
When using the enhanced reference standard instead of initial CCA interpretation, CCTA accuracy for identifying segments (patients) with ≥50% stenosis increased from 97.7% (96.5%) to 98.1% (98.2%), sensitivity from 90.5% (100%) to 90.8% (100%), and specificity from 98.4% (94.3%) to 98.9% (97.1%). CCTA identified six segments and two patients with stenoses ≥50% missed on initial CCA interpretation. Compared with the enhanced reference standard the accuracies of CCTA and of initial CCA interpretation were not different (p = 0.87).
Conclusion
CCTA compares favourably with CCA for stenosis detection. Use of a composite reference standard combining findings from both tests can control for the effect of false-negative CCA results when evaluating the accuracy of CCTA.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG et al (2008) Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive coronary angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 52:1724–1732
Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M et al (2008) Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 359:2324–2336
Becker CR, Knez A, Leber A et al (2002) Detection of coronary artery stenoses with multislice helical CT angiography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 26:750–755
Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Schmitz BL et al (2005) Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography. JAMA 293:2471–2478
Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PM, de Feyter PJ (2002) Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 106:2051–2054
Stein PD, Yaekoub AY, Matta F, Sostman HD (2008) 64-slice CT for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 121:715–725
Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS et al (2008) 64-slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 94:1386–1393
De Scheerder I, De Man F, Herregods MC et al (1994) Intravascular ultrasound versus angiography for measurement of luminal diameters in normal and diseased coronary arteries. Am Heart J 127:243–251
Grondin CM, Dyrda I, Pasternac A, Campeau L, Bourassa MG, Lesperance J (1974) Discrepancies between cineangiographic and postmortem findings in patients with coronary artery disease and recent myocardial revascularization. Circulation 49:703–708
Patel MR, Dehmer GJ, Hirshfeld JW, Smith PK, Spertus JA (2009) ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: a report by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Endorsed by the American Society of Echocardiography, the Heart Failure Society of America, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 53:530–553
Diamond GA, Forrester JS (1979) Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 300:1350–1358
Schoepf UJ, Zwerner PL, Savino G, Herzog C, Kerl JM, Costello P (2007) Coronary CT Angiography. Radiology 244:48–63
American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Ad Hoc Task Force on Cardiac Catheterization (1991) American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association. Guidelines for cardiac catheterization and cardiac catheterization laboratories. J Am Coll Cardiol 84:1149–1182
Bowker A (1948) A test for symmetry in contingency tables. J Am Stat Assoc 43:572–574
Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK et al (2007) Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 356:1503–1516
Mühlenbruch G, Seyfarth T, Soo CS, Pregalathan N, Mahnken AH (2007) Eur Radiol 17:603–609
Marano R, De Cobelli F, Floriani I et al (2009) Italian multicenter, prospective study to evaluate the negative predictive value of 16- and 64-slice MDCT imaging in patients scheduled for coronary angiography (NIMISCAD-Non Invasive Multicenter Italian Study for Coronary Artery Disease). Eur Radiol 19:1114–1123
Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Runza G et al (2006) Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Radiol 16:575–582
Husmann L, Herzog BA, Gaemperli O et al (2009) Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography coronary angiography and evaluation of stress-only single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography hybrid imaging: comparison of prospective electrocardiogram triggering vs. retrospective gating. Eur Heart J 30:600–607
Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H et al (2006) First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 16:256–268
Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, Busch S et al (2007) Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Invest Radiol 42:684–691
Ropers U, Ropers D, Pflederer T et al (2007) Influence of heart rate on the diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 50:2393–2398
Alkadhi H, Scheffel H, Desbiolles L et al (2008) Dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography: influence of obesity, calcium load, and heart rate on diagnostic accuracy. Eur Heart J 29:766–776
Husmann L, Schepis T, Scheffel H et al (2008) Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with low, intermediate, and high cardiovascular risk. Acad Radiol 15:452–461
Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I et al (2003) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349:2191–2200
Topol E, Nissen S (1995) Our preoccupation with coronary luminology. The dissociation between clinical and angiographic findings in ischemic heart disease. Circulation 92:2333–2342
Sones FM Jr (1958) Cine-cardio-angiography. Pediatr Clin N Am 5:945–979
Leber AW, Becker A, Knez A et al (2006) Accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography to classify and quantify plaque volumes in the proximal coronary system: a comparative study using intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 47:672–677
Zir LM, Miller SW, Dinsmore RE, Gilbert JP, Harthorne JW (1976) Interobserver variability in coronary angiography. Circulation 53:627–632
Zir LM (1983) Observer variability in coronary angiography. Int J Cardiol 3:171–173
Acknowledgements
U. Joseph Schoepf is a medical consultant for and receives research support from Bayer-Schering, Bracco, General Electric Healthcare, Medrad, and Siemens. Peter L. Zwerner receives research support from Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squib, Bracco, and Siemens.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kerl, J.M., Schoepf, U.J., Zwerner, P.L. et al. Accuracy of coronary artery stenosis detection with CT versus conventional coronary angiography compared with composite findings from both tests as an enhanced reference standard. Eur Radiol 21, 1895–1903 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2134-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2134-2