Dataset Information

Clinical comparison of sub-mm high-resolution non-contrast coronary CMR angiography against coronary CT angiography in patients with low-intermediate risk of coronary artery disease: a single center trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The widespread clinical application of coronary cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) angiography (CMRA) for the assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) remains limited due to low scan efficiency leading to prolonged and unpredictable acquisition times; low spatial-resolution; and residual respiratory motion artefacts resulting in limited image quality. To overcome these limitations, we have integrated highly undersampled acquisitions with image-based navigators and non-rigid motion correction to enable high resolution (sub-1 mm³) free-breathing, contrast-free 3D whole-heart coronary CMRA with 100% respiratory scan efficiency in a clinically feasible and predictable acquisition time.

Objectives

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of this coronary CMRA framework against coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) in patients with suspected CAD.

Methods

Consecutive patients (n = 50) with suspected CAD were examined on a 1.5T CMR scanner. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of coronary CMRA against coronary CTA for detecting a ≥ 50% reduction in luminal diameter.

Results

The 50 recruited patients (55 ± 9 years, 33 male) completed coronary CMRA in 10.7 ± 1.4 min. Twelve (24%) had significant CAD on coronary CTA. Coronary CMRA obtained diagnostic image quality in 95% of all, 97% of proximal, 97% of middle and 90% of distal coronary segments. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy were: per patient (100%, 74%, 55%, 100% and 80%), per vessel (81%, 88%, 46%, 97% and 88%) and per segment (76%, 95%, 44%, 99% and 94%) respectively.

Conclusions

The high diagnostic image quality and diagnostic performance of coronary CMRA compared against coronary CTA demonstrates the potential of coronary CMRA as a robust and safe non-invasive alternative for excluding significant disease in patients at low-intermediate risk of CAD.

SUBMITTER: Hajhosseiny R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8127202 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeConventional CT technology yields only modest accuracy of coronary artery stenosis assessment in severely calcified lesions. Reported herein are this study's initial observations on the potential of ultra-high-resolution CT (UHR-CT) for evaluating severely calcified coronary arterial lesions.Materials and methodsFifteen patients 45 years of age or older, with history of coronary artery disease, referred for invasive coronary angiography, were prospectively enrolled. Patients underwent UHR-CT within 30 days prior to cardiac catheterization. Image noise levels and diagnostic confidence (level 1-5) using UHR-CT were compared with reconstructed images simulating conventional CT technology. Stenosis assessment for the major coronary arteries and the left main coronary artery with UHR-CT and invasive angiography were compared. Results from clinically driven coronary CT using conventional technology were considered for comparison when available.ResultsMean patient age was 67 years (range, 53-79 years). Thirteen patients were men, nine had obesity. Radiation dose was 9.3 mSv owing to expanded x-ray exposure to accommodate research software application (70%-99% of R-R cycle). Overall image noise was considerably greater for UHR-CT (50.9 ± 7.8 [standard deviation]) versus conventional CT image reconstruction (19.5 ± 8.3, P < .01), yet diagnostic confidence scores for UHR-CT were high (4.3 ± 0.9). Average calcium score in patients without stents (n = 6) was 1205, and of 86 vessels evaluated, 22 had 70% or greater stenosis depicted with invasive angiography (26%). Stenosis comparison with invasive angiography yielded 86% (19 of 22) sensitivity and 88% (56 of 64) specificity (95% CI: 65%, 97%; and 77%, 95%, respectively).ConclusionInitial observations suggest UHR-CT may be effective in overcoming the limitation of conventional CT for accurately evaluating coronary artery stenoses in severely calcified vessels.Keywords: CT-Angiography, Coronary Arteries, ArteriosclerosisClinical trial registration no. NCT04272060See also commentary by Shanbhag and Chen in this issue.© RSNA, 2021.

Project description:ObjectiveBecause there is evidence for a clinical benefit of using coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography instead of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD), we ascertained if patient satisfaction could represent an important barrier to implementation of coronary CT in clinical practice.Materials and methodsA total of 329 patients with suspected CAD and clinical indication for ICA were randomly assigned to undergo either CT or ICA for guiding treatment. Satisfaction for both groups was assessed by patient questionnaire completed twice, ≥24 h after CT or ICA, and at follow-up after a median of 3.7 years. Assessment included preparation, concern, comfort, helplessness, pain, willingness to undergo tests again, overall satisfaction, and preference. Pearson's chi-square test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used.ResultsOverall, 91% of patients undergoing CT (152/167) and 86% undergoing ICA completed assessment (140/162, p = 0.19). Patients reported being significantly better prepared for CT, less concerned about the test, and felt less helpless than during ICA (all: p < 0.001). Subjective pain (horizontal nonmarked visual analogue scale) was significantly lower for CT (6.9 ± 14.7) than for ICA (17.1 ± 22.7; p < 0.001). At follow-up, significantly more patients in the CT group reported very good satisfaction with communication of findings compared with the ICA group (p < 0.001) and 92% would recommend the institution to someone referred for the same examination.ConclusionsResults from our single-center randomized study show very good satisfaction with coronary CT compared to ICA. Thus, superior acceptance of CT should be considered in shared decision-making.Clinical relevance statementThis evaluation of patient satisfaction in a randomized study shows that patients' preference is in line with the clinical benefit provided by CT and also suggests to prefer a CT-first strategy in suspected coronary artery disease.Key points• Subjective pain was significantly lower for coronary CT angiography than for invasive coronary angiography and patients felt better prepared and less concerned about CT. • Patients were overall more satisfied with coronary CT angiography than invasive coronary angiography in a randomized controlled trial. • After a median follow-up of 3.7 years, more patients in the CT group indicated very good satisfaction with the communication of findings and with the examination itself.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study sought to determine prognostic value of nonobstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events and to determine whether incorporation of this information into the pooled cohort equation reclassifies recommendations for statin therapy as defined by the 2013 guidelines for cholesterol management of the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA).BackgroundDetection of nonobstructive CAD by coronary computed tomography angiography may improve risk stratification and permit individualized and more appropriate allocation of statin therapy.MethodsThis study determined the pooled hazard ratio of nonobstructive CAD for ASCVD events from published studies and incorporated this information into the ACC/AHA pooled cohort equation. The study calculated revised sex- and ethnicity-based 10-year ASCVD risk and determined boundaries corresponding to the original 7.5% risk for ASCVD events. It also assessed reclassification for statin eligibility by incorporating the results from meta-analysis to individual patients from a separate cohort.ResultsThis study included 2 studies (2,295 subjects; 66% male; prevalence of nonobstructive CAD, 47%; median follow-up, 49 months; 67 ASCVD events). The hazard ratio of nonobstructive CAD for ASCVD events was 3.2 (95% confidence interval: 1.5 to 6.7). Incorporation of this information into the pooled cohort equation resulted in reclassification toward statin eligibility in individuals with nonobstructive CAD, with an original ASCVD score of 3.0% and 5.9% or higher in African-American women and men and a score of 4.4% and 4.6% or higher in Caucasian women and men, respectively. The absence of nonobstructive CAD resulted in reclassification toward statin ineligibility if the original ASCVD score was as 10.0% and 17.9% or lower in African-American women and men and 13.7% and 14.3% or lower in Caucasian women and men, respectively. Reclassification is observed in 14% of patients.ConclusionsDetection of nonobstructive CAD by coronary computed tomography angiography improves risk stratification and permits individualized and more appropriate allocation of statin therapy across sex and ethnicity groups.

Project description:BackgroundCoronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is affected by calcification artifacts, which reduces its diagnostic efficacy. CT-derived fractional flow reserve (CTFFR) based on CCTA has been proven to be accurate in the diagnosis of non-calcified patients, but its clinical use in patients with calcified coronary artery disease remains to be investigated. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of coronary artery calcification on CTFFR.MethodsCCTA, coronary angiography, and FFR were performed on 128 patients in three clinical medical centers. Local investigators performed an assessment of stenosis for CCTA and the core laboratory performed the CTFFR calculations. CTFFR ≤0.8 and diameter stenosis ≥50% for CCTA was identified as lesion-specific ischemia. The diagnostic performance of CTFFR in identifying the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy was analyzed using an invasive FFR ≤0.8 as the gold standard. We compared the diagnostic performances between CTFFR and CCTA according to the level of calcification. We divided patients into four groups based on the coronary artery calcification score [coronary artery calcification score (CACS) =0, >0 to <100, ≥100 to <400, and ≥400].ResultsThe Youden index indicated an optimal threshold of 0.80 for CTFFR to identify functionally ischemic lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for CTFFR on a per-patient basis were 90% (80-96%), 98% (92-99%), 94% (89-97%), 98% (91-99%), 92% (83-97%), and 96.9% (94.2-99.6%), respectively. Compared to CCTA, CTFFR had a higher specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV, and AUC in both the low to intermediate calcification group and the high calcification group. The diagnostic efficacy of CTFFR was higher than that of CCTA without the influence of calcification.ConclusionsThis Chinese multi-center study showed that CTFFR based on novel computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling demonstrated very high diagnostic efficacy compared to the invasive measurement of FFR in all lesions suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Of particular note are the high specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of CTFFR, even in patients with calcification, which were significantly better than previous CCTA assessments.