Diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease using computed tomography angiography in patients with stable chest pain depending on clinical probability and in clinically important subgroups: Meta-analysis of individual patient data

Objective To determine whether coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) should be performed in patients with any clinical probability of coronary artery disease (CAD), and whether the diagnostic performance differs between subgroups of patients. Design Prospectively designed meta-analysis of individual patient data from prospective diagnostic accuracy studies. Data sources Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for published studies. Unpublished studies were identified via direct contact with participating investigators. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Prospective diagnostic accuracy studies that compared coronary CTA with coronary angiography as the reference standard, using at least a 50% diameter reduction as a cutoff value for obstructive CAD. All patients needed to have a clinical indication for coronary angiography due to suspected CAD, and both tests had to be performed in all patients. Results had to be provided using 2 72 or 3 72 cross tabulations for the comparison of CTA with coronary angiography. Primary outcomes were the positive and negative predictive values of CTA as a function of clinical pretest probability of obstructive CAD, analysed by a generalised linear mixed model; calculations were performed including and excluding non-diagnostic CTA results. The no-treat/treat threshold model was used to determine the range of appropriate pretest probabilities for CTA. The threshold model was based on obtained post-test probabilities of less than 15% in case of negative CTA and above 50% in case of positive CTA. Sex, angina pectoris type, age, and number of computed tomography detector rows were used as clinical variables to analyse the diagnostic performance in relevant subgroups. Results Individual patient data from 5332 patients from 65 prospective diagnostic accuracy studies were retrieved. For a pretest probability range of 7-67%, the treat threshold of more than 50% and the no-treat threshold of less than 15% post-test probability were obtained using CTA. At a pretest probability of 7%, the positive predictive value of CTA was 50.9% (95% confidence interval 43.3% to 57.7%) and the negative predictive value of CTA was 97.8% (96.4% to 98.7%); corresponding values at a pretest probability of 67% were 82.7% (78.3% to 86.2%) and 85.0% (80.2% to 88.9%), respectively. The overall sensitivity of CTA was 95.2% (92.6% to 96.9%) and the specificity was 79.2% (74.9% to 82.9%). CTA using more than 64 detector rows was associated with a higher empirical sensitivity than CTA using up to 64 rows (93.4% v 86.5%, P=0.002) and specificity (84.4% v 72.6%, P<0.001). The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for CTA was 0.897 (0.889 to 0.906), and the diagnostic performance of CTA was slightly lower in women than in with men (area under the curve 0.874 (0.858 to 0.890) v 0.907 (0.897 to 0.916), P<0.001). The diagnostic performance of CTA was slightly lower in patients older than 75 (0.864 (0.834 to 0.894), P=0.018 v all other age groups) and was not significantly influenced by angina pectoris type (typical angina 0.895 (0.873 to 0.917), atypical angina 0.898 (0.884 to 0.913), non-anginal chest pain 0.884 (0.870 to 0.899), other chest discomfort 0.915 (0.897 to 0.934)). Conclusions In a no-treat/treat threshold model, the diagnosis of obstructive CAD using coronary CTA in patients with stable chest pain was most accurate when the clinical pretest probability was between 7% and 67%. Performance of CTA was not influenced by the angina pectoris type and was slightly higher in men and lower in older patients. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42012002780

Diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease using computed tomography angiography in patients with stable chest pain depending on clinical probability and in clinically important subgroups: Meta-analysis of individual patient data

Objective To determine whether coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) should be performed in patients with any clinical probability of coronary artery disease (CAD), and whether the diagnostic performance differs between subgroups of patients. Design Prospectively designed meta-analysis of individual patient data from prospective diagnostic accuracy studies. Data sources Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for published studies. Unpublished studies were identified via direct contact with participating investigators. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Prospective diagnostic accuracy studies that compared coronary CTA with coronary angiography as the reference standard, using at least a 50% diameter reduction as a cutoff value for obstructive CAD. All patients needed to have a clinical indication for coronary angiography due to suspected CAD, and both tests had to be performed in all patients. Results had to be provided using 2×2 or 3×2 cross tabulations for the comparison of CTA with coronary angiography. Primary outcomes were the positive and negative predictive values of CTA as a function of clinical pretest probability of obstructive CAD, analysed by a generalised linear mixed model; calculations were performed including and excluding non-diagnostic CTA results. The no-treat/treat threshold model was used to determine the range of appropriate pretest probabilities for CTA. The threshold model was based on obtained post-test probabilities of less than 15% in case of negative CTA and above 50% in case of positive CTA. Sex, angina pectoris type, age, and number of computed tomography detector rows were used as clinical variables to analyse the diagnostic performance in relevant subgroups. Results Individual patient data from 5332 patients from 65 prospective diagnostic accuracy studies were retrieved. For a pretest probability range of 7-67%, the treat threshold of more than 50% and the no-treat threshold of less than 15% post-test probability were obtained using CTA. At a pretest probability of 7%, the positive predictive value of CTA was 50.9% (95% confidence interval 43.3% to 57.7%) and the negative predictive value of CTA was 97.8% (96.4% to 98.7%); corresponding values at a pretest probability of 67% were 82.7% (78.3% to 86.2%) and 85.0% (80.2% to 88.9%), respectively. The overall sensitivity of CTA was 95.2% (92.6% to 96.9%) and the specificity was 79.2% (74.9% to 82.9%). CTA using more than 64 detector rows was associated with a higher empirical sensitivity than CTA using up to 64 rows (93.4% v 86.5%, P=0.002) and specificity (84.4% v 72.6%, P<0.001). The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for CTA was 0.897 (0.889 to 0.906), and the diagnostic performance of CTA was slightly lower in women than in with men (area under the curve 0.874 (0.858 to 0.890) v 0.907 (0.897 to 0.916), P<0.001). The diagnostic performance of CTA was slightly lower in patients older than 75 (0.864 (0.834 to 0.894), P=0.018 v all other age groups) and was not significantly influenced by angina pectoris type (typical angina 0.895 (0.873 to 0.917), atypical angina 0.898 (0.884 to 0.913), non-anginal chest pain 0.884 (0.870 to 0.899), other chest discomfort 0.915 (0.897 to 0.934)). Conclusions In a no-treat/treat threshold model, the diagnosis of obstructive CAD using coronary CTA in patients with stable chest pain was most accurate when the clinical pretest probability was between 7% and 67%. Performance of CTA was not influenced by the angina pectoris type and was slightly higher in men and lower in older patients. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42012002780

Ischemia and No Obstructive Stenosis (INOCA) at CT Angiography, CT Myocardial Perfusion, Invasive Coronary Angiography, and SPECT: The CORE320 Study

Background: CT allows evaluation of atherosclerosis, coronary stenosis, and myocardial ischemia. Data on the characterization of ischemia and no obstructive stenosis (INOCA) at CT remain limited.Purpose: This was an observational study to describe the prevalence of INOCA defined at coronary CT angiography with CT perfusion imaging and associated clinical and atherosclerotic characteristics. The analysis was also performed for the combination of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and SPECT as a secondary aim.Materials and Methods: The prospective CORE320 study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00934037) enrolled participants between November 2009 and July 2011 who were symptomatic and referred for clinically indicated ICA. Participants underwent CT angiography, rest-adenosinestress CT perfusion, and rest-stress SPECT prior to ICA. For this ancillary study, the following three phenotypes were considered, using either CT angiography/CT perfusion or ICA/SPECT data: (a) participants with obstructive (>= 50%) stenosis, (b) participants with no obstructive stenosis but ischemia (ie, INOCA) on the basis of abnormal perfusion imaging results, and (c) participants with no obstructive stenosis and normal perfusion imaging results. Clinical characteristics and CT angiography athero-scleroticplaque measures were compared by using the Pearson chi(2) or Wilcoxon rank-sum test.Results: A total of 381 participants (mean age, 62 years [interquartile range, 56-68 years]; 129 [34%] women) were evaluated. A total of 31 (27%) of 115 participants without obstructive (>= 50%) stenosis at CT angiography had abnormal CT perfusion findings. The corresponding value for ICA/SPECT was 45 (30%) of 151. The prevalence of INOCA was 31 (8%) of 381 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5%, 11%) with CT angiography/CT perfusion and 45 (12%) of 381 (95% CI: 9%, 15%) with ICA/SPECT. Participants with CT-defined INOCA had greater total atheroma volume (118 vs 60 mm(3), P =.008), more positive remodeling (13% vs 1%, P =.006), and greater low-attenuation atheroma volume (20 vs 10 mm(3), P =.007) than participants with no obstructive stenosis and no ischemia. Comparisons for ICA/SPECT showed similar trends.Conclusion: In CORE320, ischemia and no obstructivestenosis (INOCA) prevalence was 8% and 12% at CT angiography/CT perfusion and invasive coronary angiography/SPECT, respectively. Participants with INOCA had greater atherosclerotic burden and more adverse plaque features at CT compared with those with no obstructive stenosis and no ischemia. (C) RSNA, 2019Cardiolog

Diagnostic accuracy of semi-automatic quantitative metrics as an alternative to expert reading of CT myocardial perfusion in the CORE320 study

Cardiolog

Incremental diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging over coronary angiography stratified by pre-test probability of coronary artery disease and severity of coronary artery calcification: The CORE320 study

Cardiovascular Aspects of Radiolog

Patient Preferences for Coronary CT Angiography with Stress Perfusion, SPECT, or Invasive Coronary Angiography

Cardiovascular Aspects of Radiolog