Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 2 de 2
1.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging ; 17(9): 951-60, 2016 Sep.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26992419

AIMS: Hybrid imaging provides a non-invasive assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion. We sought to evaluate the added clinical value of hybrid imaging in a multi-centre multi-vendor setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fourteen centres enrolled 252 patients with stable angina and intermediate (20-90%) pre-test likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS), CT coronary angiography (CTCA), and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) with fractional flow reserve (FFR). Hybrid MPS/CTCA images were obtained by 3D image fusion. Blinded core-lab analyses were performed for CTCA, MPS, QCA and hybrid datasets. Hemodynamically significant CAD was ruled-in non-invasively in the presence of a matched finding (myocardial perfusion defect co-localized with stenosed coronary artery) and ruled-out with normal findings (both CTCA and MPS normal). Overall prevalence of significant CAD on QCA (>70% stenosis or 30-70% with FFR≤0.80) was 37%. Of 1004 pathological myocardial segments on MPS, 246 (25%) were reclassified from their standard coronary distribution to another territory by hybrid imaging. In this respect, in 45/252 (18%) patients, hybrid imaging reassigned an entire perfusion defect to another coronary territory, changing the final diagnosis in 42% of the cases. Hybrid imaging allowed non-invasive CAD rule-out in 41%, and rule-in in 24% of patients, with a negative and positive predictive value of 88% and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients at intermediate risk of CAD, hybrid imaging allows non-invasive co-localization of myocardial perfusion defects and subtending coronary arteries, impacting clinical decision-making in almost one every five subjects.


Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial/physiology , Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted , Multimodal Imaging/methods , Myocardial Ischemia/diagnostic imaging , Aged , Cohort Studies , Computed Tomography Angiography/methods , Coronary Angiography/methods , Coronary Artery Disease/physiopathology , Europe , Female , Humans , Internationality , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Ischemia/physiopathology , Myocardial Perfusion Imaging/methods , Observer Variation , Positron-Emission Tomography/methods , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity , Statistics, Nonparametric , Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon/methods
2.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25711274

BACKGROUND: The choice of imaging techniques in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) varies between countries, regions, and hospitals. This prospective, multicenter, comparative effectiveness study was designed to assess the relative accuracy of commonly used imaging techniques for identifying patients with significant CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 475 patients with stable chest pain and intermediate likelihood of CAD underwent coronary computed tomographic angiography and stress myocardial perfusion imaging by single photon emission computed tomography or positron emission tomography, and ventricular wall motion imaging by stress echocardiography or cardiac magnetic resonance. If ≥1 test was abnormal, patients underwent invasive coronary angiography. Significant CAD was defined by invasive coronary angiography as >50% stenosis of the left main stem, >70% stenosis in a major coronary vessel, or 30% to 70% stenosis with fractional flow reserve ≤0.8. Significant CAD was present in 29% of patients. In a patient-based analysis, coronary computed tomographic angiography had the highest diagnostic accuracy, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve being 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.94), sensitivity being 91%, and specificity being 92%. Myocardial perfusion imaging had good diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve, 0.74; confidence interval, 0.69-0.78), sensitivity 74%, and specificity 73%. Wall motion imaging had similar accuracy (area under the curve, 0.70; confidence interval, 0.65-0.75) but lower sensitivity (49%, P<0.001) and higher specificity (92%, P<0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging and wall motion imaging were lower than that of coronary computed tomographic angiography (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter European population of patients with stable chest pain and low prevalence of CAD, coronary computed tomographic angiography is more accurate than noninvasive functional testing for detecting significant CAD defined invasively. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00979199.


Coronary Angiography/methods , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis , Coronary Stenosis/diagnosis , Echocardiography, Stress , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Myocardial Perfusion Imaging/methods , Positron-Emission Tomography , Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Aged , Area Under Curve , Comparative Effectiveness Research , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/epidemiology , Coronary Artery Disease/physiopathology , Coronary Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Stenosis/epidemiology , Coronary Stenosis/physiopathology , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prevalence , Prospective Studies , ROC Curve , Severity of Illness Index , Ventricular Function
...