Variability of radiation doses of cardiac diagnostic imaging tests: the RADIO-EVINCI study (RADIationdOse subproject of the EVINCI study)

Background: Patients with coronary artery disease can accumulate significant radiation dose through repeated exposures to coronary computed tomographic angiography, myocardial perfusion imaging with single photon emission computed tomography or positron emission tomography, and to invasive coronary angiography. Aim of the study was to audit radiation doses of coronary computed tomographic angiography, single photon emission computed tomography, positron emission tomography and invasive coronary angiography in patients enrolled in the prospective, randomized, multi-centre European study-EVINCI (Evaluation of Integrated Cardiac Imaging for the Detection and Characterization of Ischemic Heart Disease).Methods: We reviewed 1070 tests (476 coronary computed tomographic angiographies, 85 positron emission tomographies, 310 single photon emission computed tomographies, 199 invasive coronary angiographies) performed in 476 patients (mean age 60 +/- 9 years, 60% males) enrolled in 12 centers of the EVINCI. The effective doses were calculated in milli-Sievert (mSv) as median, interquartile range (IQR) and coefficient of variation of the mean.Results: Coronary computed tomographic angiography (476 exams in 12 centers) median effective dose was 9. 6 mSv (IQR = 13.2 mSv); single photon emission computed tomography (310 exams in 9 centers) effective dose was 9.3 (IQR = 2.8); positron emission tomography (85 in 3 centers) effective dose 1.8 (IQR = 1.6) and invasive coronary angiography (199 in 9 centers) effective dose 7.4 (IQR = 7.3). Inter-institutional variability was highest for invasive coronary angiography (100%) and coronary computed tomographic angiography (54%) and lowest for single photon emission computed tomography (20%). Intra-institutional variability was highest for invasive coronary angiography (121%) and coronary computed tomographic angiography (115%) and lowest for single photon emission computed tomography (14%).Conclusion: Coronary computed tomographic angiography and invasive coronary angiography doses vary substantially between and within centers. The variability in nuclear medicine procedures is substantially lower. The findings highlight the need to audit doses, to track cumulative exposures and to standardize doses for imaging techniques

Variability of radiation doses of cardiac diagnostic imaging tests: the RADIO-EVINCI study (RADIationdOse subproject of the EVINCI study)

Background: Patients with coronary artery disease can accumulate significant radiation dose through repeated exposures to coronary computed tomographic angiography, myocardial perfusion imaging with single photon emission computed tomography or positron emission tomography, and to invasive coronary angiography. Aim of the study was to audit radiation doses of coronary computed tomographic angiography, single photon emission computed tomography, positron emission tomography and invasive coronary angiography in patients enrolled in the prospective, randomized, multi-centre European study–EVINCI (Evaluation of Integrated Cardiac Imaging for the Detection and Characterization of Ischemic Heart Disease).Methods: We reviewed 1070 tests (476 coronary computed tomographic angiographies, 85 positron emission tomographies, 310 single photon emission computed tomographies, 199 invasive coronary angiographies) performed in 476 patients (mean age 60 ± 9 years, 60% males) enrolled in 12 centers of the EVINCI. The effective doses were calculated in milli-Sievert (mSv) as median, interquartile range (IQR) and coefficient of variation of the mean.Results: Coronary computed tomographic angiography (476 exams in 12 centers) median effective dose was 9.6 mSv (IQR = 13.2 mSv); single photon emission computed tomography (310 exams in 9 centers) effective dose was 9.3 (IQR = 2.8); positron emission tomography (85 in 3 centers) effective dose 1.8 (IQR = 1.6) and invasive coronary angiography (199 in 9 centers) effective dose 7.4 (IQR = 7.3). Inter-institutional variability was highest for invasive coronary angiography (100%) and coronary computed tomographic angiography (54%) and lowest for single photon emission computed tomography (20%). Intra-institutional variability was highest for invasive coronary angiography (121%) and coronary computed tomographic angiography (115%) and lowest for single photon emission computed tomography (14%).Conclusion: Coronary computed tomographic angiography and invasive coronary angiography doses vary substantially between and within centers. The variability in nuclear medicine procedures is substantially lower. The findings highlight the need to audit doses, to track cumulative exposures and to standardize doses for imaging techniques.Trial registration: The study protocol is available at https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00979199). Information provided on September 16, 2009

Anatomical and functional coronary imaging to predict long-term outcome in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the EVINCI-outcome study

AIMS To investigate the prognostic relevance of coronary anatomy, coronary function, and early revascularization in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS From March 2009 to June 2012, 430 patients with suspected CAD (61 ± 9 years, 62% men) underwent coronary anatomical imaging by computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) and coronary functional imaging followed by invasive coronary angiography (ICA) if at least one non-invasive test was abnormal. Obstructive CAD was documented by ICA in 119 patients and 90 were revascularized within 90 days of enrolment. Core laboratory analysis showed that 134 patients had obstructive CAD by CTCA (>50% stenosis in major coronary vessels) and 79 significant ischaemia by functional imaging [>10% left ventricular (LV) myocardium]. Over mean follow-up of 4.4 years, major adverse events (AEs) (all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or hospital admission for unstable angina or heart failure) or AEs plus late revascularization (LR) occurred in 40 (9.3%) and 58 (13.5%) patients, respectively. Obstructive CAD at CTCA was the only independent imaging predictor of AEs [hazard ratio (HR) 3.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-9.30; P = 0.033] and AEs plus LR (HR 4.3, 95% CI 1.56-11.81; P = 0.005). Patients with CAD in whom early revascularization was performed in the presence of ischaemia and deferred in its absence had fewer AEs, similar to patients without CAD (HR 2.0, 95% CI 0.71-5.51; P = 0.195). CONCLUSION Obstructive CAD imaged by CTCA is an independent predictor of clinical outcome. Early management of CAD targeted to the combined anatomical and functional disease phenotype improves clinical outcome

A New Integrated Clinical-Biohumoral Model to Predict Functionally Significant Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Chronic Chest Pain

Cardiolog

Detection of significant coronary artery disease by noninvasive anatomical and functional imaging

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 651 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 640.8. 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