"skipMainNavigation"
Search
Quick Search in Journals
Quick Search anywhere
Advanced Search
Radiology
Menu
Previous
Next
Original Research

Functionally Relevant Coronary Artery Disease: Comparison of 64-Section CT Angiography with Myocardial Perfusion SPECT

Published Online:Aug 1 2008https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2482071307

Abstract

Purpose: To prospectively determine the accuracy of 64-section computed tomographic (CT) angiography for the depiction of coronary artery disease (CAD) that induces perfusion defects at myocardial perfusion imaging with single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), by using myocardial perfusion imaging as the reference standard.

Materials and Methods: All patients gave written informed consent after the study details, including radiation exposure, were explained. The study protocol was approved by the local institutional review board. In patients referred for elective conventional coronary angiography, an additional 64-section CT angiography study and a myocardial perfusion imaging study (1-day adenosine stress-rest protocol) with technetium 99m–tetrofosmin SPECT were performed before conventional angiography. Coronary artery diameter narrowing of 50% or greater at CT angiography was defined as stenosis and was compared with the myocardial perfusion imaging findings. Quantitative coronary angiography served as a reference standard for CT angiography.

Results: A total of 1093 coronary segments in 310 coronary arteries in 78 patients (mean age, 65 years ± 9 [standard deviation]; 35 women) were analyzed. CT angiography revealed stenoses in 137 segments (13%) corresponding to 91 arteries (29%) in 46 patients (59%). SPECT revealed 14 reversible, 13 fixed, and six partially reversible defects in 31 patients (40%). Sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values, respectively, of CT angiography in the detection of reversible myocardial perfusion imaging defects were 95%, 53%, 94%, and 58% on a per-patient basis and 95%, 75%, 96%, and 72% on a per-artery basis. Agreement between CT and conventional angiography was very good (96% and κ = 0.92 for patient-based analysis, 93% and κ = 0.84 for vessel-based analysis).

Conclusion: Sixty-four–section CT angiography can help rule out hemodynamically relevant CAD in patients with intermediate to high pretest likelihood, although an abnormal CT angiography study is a poor predictor of ischemia.

© RSNA, 2008

References

  • 1 Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM, et al. ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group, American College of Radiology, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Interventional Radiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48: 1475–1497.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS, et al. Assessment of coronary artery disease by cardiac computed tomography: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and Committee on Cardiac Imaging, Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation 2006; 114: 1761–1791.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill WW, Goldstein JA. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46: 552–557.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Runza G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 575–582.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA, et al. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 2005; 112: 2318–2323.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 2005; 26: 1482–1487.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46: 147–154.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 2739–2747.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Topol EJ, Nissen SE. Our preoccupation with coronary luminology: the dissociation between clinical and angiographic findings in ischemic heart disease. Circulation 1995; 92: 2333–2342.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 10 White CW, Wright CB, Doty DB, et al. Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriogram predict the physiologic importance of a coronary stenosis? N Engl J Med 1984; 310: 819–824.
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Lorell BH, et al. ACC/AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging: executive summary—a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASNC Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging). J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 42: 1318–1333.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Iskander S, Iskandrian AE. Risk assessment using single-photon emission computed tomographic technetium-99m sestamibi imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 32: 57–62.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, Shaw LJ, et al. Incremental prognostic value of myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography for the prediction of cardiac death: differential stratification for risk of cardiac death and myocardial infarction. Circulation 1998; 97: 535–543.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS. Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 2003; 107: 2900–2907.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hacker M, Jakobs T, Matthiesen F, et al. Comparison of spiral multidetector CT angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging in the noninvasive detection of functionally relevant coronary artery lesions: first clinical experiences. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 1294–1300.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hacker M, Jakobs T, Hack N, et al. Sixty-four slice spiral CT angiography does not predict the functional relevance of coronary artery stenoses in patients with stable angina. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 34: 4–10.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Schuijf JD, Wijns W, Jukema JW, et al. Relationship between noninvasive coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48: 2508–2514.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Koepfli P, et al. Accuracy of 64-slice CT angiography for the detection of functionally relevant coronary stenoses as assessed with myocardial perfusion SPECT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007; 34: 1162–1171.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Radiology 2003; 226: 24–28.
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Leschka S, Wildermuth S, Boehm T, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. Radiology 2006; 241: 378–385.
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL, et al. A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 1975; 51: 5–40.
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Cerqueira MD, Verani MS, Schwaiger M, Heo J, Iskandrian AS. Safety profile of adenosine stress perfusion imaging: results from the Adenoscan Multicenter Trial Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 384–389.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Hesse B, Tagil K, Cuocolo A, et al. EANM/ESC procedural guidelines for myocardial perfusion imaging in nuclear cardiology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 855–897.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Koepfli P, Hany TF, Wyss CA, et al. CT attenuation correction for myocardial perfusion quantification using a PET/CT hybrid scanner. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 537–542.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Fricke H, Fricke E, Weise R, Kammeier A, Lindner O, Burchert W. A method to remove artifacts in attenuation-corrected myocardial perfusion SPECT introduced by misalignment between emission scan and CT-derived attenuation maps. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 1619–1625.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Germano G, Kavanagh PB, Waechter P, et al. A new algorithm for the quantitation of myocardial perfusion SPECT. I. Technical principles and reproducibility. J Nucl Med 2000; 41: 712–719.
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Fleischmann S, Koepfli P, Namdar M, Wyss CA, Jenni R, Kaufmann PA. Gated (99m)Tc-tetrofosmin SPECT for discriminating infarct from artifact in fixed myocardial perfusion defects. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 754–759.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Obuchowski NA. Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology. Radiology 2003; 229: 3–8.
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Garcia MJ, Lessick J, Hoffmann MH. Accuracy of 16-row multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis. JAMA 2006; 296: 403–411.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests 2: predictive values. BMJ 1994; 309:102.
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Fluss R, Faraggi D, Reiser B. Estimation of the Youden Index and its associated cutoff point. Biom J 2005; 47: 458–472.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, Kastrati A, Martinoff S, Schomig A. Prevalence of noncalcified coronary plaques by 64-slice computed tomography in patients with an intermediate risk for significant coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48: 312–318.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Berman DS, Hachamovitch R, Shaw LJ, et al. Roles of nuclear cardiology, cardiac computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance: noninvasive risk stratification and a conceptual framework for the selection of noninvasive imaging tests in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 1107–1118.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Glover DK, Ruiz M, Yang JY, Smith WH, Watson DD, Beller GA. Myocardial 99mTc-tetrofosmin uptake during adenosine-induced vasodilatation with either a critical or mild coronary stenosis: comparison with 201Tl and regional myocardial blood flow. Circulation 1997; 96: 2332–2338.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Kapur A, Latus KA, Davies G, et al. A comparison of three radionuclide myocardial perfusion tracers in clinical practice: the ROBUST study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002; 29: 1608–1616.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar

Article History

Published in print: 2008