Multi-Detector CT Coronary Angiography Accuracy in the Evaluation of Significant Coronary Arteries Stenosis versus Invasive Coronary Angiography Procedures.
Keywords:
Multi-Detector CT, Coronary Angiography, Significant Stenosis, Invasive Coronary Angiography, Coronary Artery Disease, Diagnostic Accuracy, Non-Invasive Imaging, Cardiac CT, CAD Diagnosis, Coronary Stenosis Evaluation.
Abstract
Background: - Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the recognized gold standard for evaluating stenosis in the coronary arteries due to its unparalleled temporal and spatial resolution and the capacity to carry out therapeutic interventions in the same session. The search for a non-invasive alternative has been fueled by the patient's inconvenience and financial concerns, even though the risk of major complications is low. All the patients prepared by assessment of renal function test with aid of nephrourologists as a preliminary test to avoid nephrotoxicity of contrast dye and exclude those with azotemia or impaired renal function. The evaluation of coronary artery disease (CAD) using current multi-detectors computed tomography (MSCT) scanners shows promise; however, some segments cannot be evaluated because of motion artifacts or significant calcification of the arterial wall.
References
Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, Arnett DK, Blaha MJ, Cushman M, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2015; 131(4):29–322.
Khalaf MA, Youash FT. Diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease by computed tomography angiography as compared to conventional invasive angiography. Kirkuk Journal of Medical Sciences. 2023 Apr 1;11(1):1-20.
Shuker AI. Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of coronary heart disease among population in Kirkuk city.
Chen SJ, Lin MT, Lee WJ, Liu KL, Wang JK, Chang CI, et al. Coronary artery anatomy in children with congenital heart disease by computed tomography. Int J Cardiol. 2007; 120:363–370
Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS, Walker S, Fraser C, Jia X, et al. 64-Slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart. 2008; 94(11):1386–93
Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS, Carr JJ, Goldin JG, Greenland P, Guerci AD, Lima JA, Rader DJ, Rubin GD, Shaw LJ, Wiegers SE. 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
Dewey M, Hamm B. Cost-effectiveness of coronary angiography and calcium scoring using CT and stress MRI for diagnosis of coronary artery disease. EurRadiol 2007; 17:1301-1309.
Xu Y, Tang L, Zhu X, Xu H, Tang J, Yang Z, et al. Comparison of dual-source CT coronary angiography and conventional coronary angiography for detecting coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging.2010; 26(1):75–81.
Bax JJ, Inzucchi SE, Bonow RO, Schuijf JD, Freeman MR, Barrett EJ.Cardiac imaging for risk stratification in diabetes. Diabetes Care 2007; 30:1295-304.
Hamon M, Biondi-Zoccai GG, Malagutti P, et al. Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared with conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. J Am CollCardiol 2006; (48)1896 –910
Hamon M, Morello R, Riddell JW, Hamon M. Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography—meta-analysis.Radiology2007;245:720 –31
Mowatt G, Cummins E, Waugh N, Walker S, Cook J, Jia X, et al.A systemic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in the investigation of coronary artery disease.HealthTechnol Assess. 2008; 12(17):140-143.
Alex B. Meijer, Ying L. O, Jacob Geleijns and Lucia J. M. Kroft.MetaAnalysis of 40- and 64-MDCT Angiography for Assessing Coronary Artery Stenosis. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2008; 191: 1667-1675
Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, Arbab-Zadeh A, Niinuma H, Gottlieb
I, Paul N, Clouse ME, Shapiro EP, Hoe J, Lardo AC, Bush DE, de Roos A, Cox C, Brinker J, Lima JA. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008; 359:2324-36.
Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Vliegen HW, Salm LP, de Roos A, van der Wall EE. Noninvasive angiography and assessment of left ventricular function using multislice computed tomography in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004; 27:2905–291
Stein PD, Yaekoub AY, Matta F, Sostman HD. 64-slice CT for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 2008; 121:715-25.
Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, Goldstein JA. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am CollCardiol 2005; 46:552-7.
Dewey M, Vavere AL, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, Sara L, Cox C, Gottlieb I, Yoshioka K, Paul N, Hoe J, de Roos A, Lardo AC, Lima JA, Clouse ME. Patient characteristics as predictors of image quality and diagnostic accuracy of MDCT compared with conventional coronary angiography for detecting coronary artery stenoses: CORE-64 Multicenter International Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194:93-10
Manghat NE, Morgan-Hughes GJ, Broadley AJ, et al. 16-Detector row computed tomographic coronary angiography in patients undergoing evaluation for aortic valve replacement: comparison with catheter angiography. ClinRadiol 2006; 61:749 –57
Morin RL, Gerber TC, McCollough CH, et al. Radiation dose in computed tomography of the heart. Circulation 2003;107:917-922.
Vogl TJ, Abolmaali ND, Diebold T, Engelmann K, Ay M, Dogan S, Wimmer-Greinecker G, Moritz A, Herzog C. Techniques for the detection of coronary atherosclerosis: multi-detector row CT coronary angiography. Radiology 2002; 223:212-20
Namgung J, Choe H, Kwon SU, Doh JH, Lee SY, Hur G, Lee WR. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multidetector CT coronary angiography for the evaluation of coronary artery disease. Korean J Med 2008; 75:42-53.
Abdulla J, Abildstrom SZ, Gotzsche O, Christensen E, Kober L, TorpPedersen C. 64-Multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as a potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2007;28:3042–50.
Ferencik M, Nomura CH, Maurovich-Horvat P, et al. Quantitative parameters of image quality in 64-slice computed tomography angiography of the coronary arteries. Eur J Radiol 2006; 57:373–379
Pugliese F, Mollet NRA, Runza G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. EurRadiol 2006; 16:575–582
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
Gorenoi V, Schönermark MP, Hagen A. CT coronary angiography vs. invasive coronary angiography in CHD. GMS Health Technol Assess. 2012; 8:Doc02.
Khalaf MA, Youash FT. Diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease by computed tomography angiography as compared to conventional invasive angiography. Kirkuk Journal of Medical Sciences. 2023 Apr 1;11(1):1-20.
Shuker AI. Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of coronary heart disease among population in Kirkuk city.
Chen SJ, Lin MT, Lee WJ, Liu KL, Wang JK, Chang CI, et al. Coronary artery anatomy in children with congenital heart disease by computed tomography. Int J Cardiol. 2007; 120:363–370
Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS, Walker S, Fraser C, Jia X, et al. 64-Slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart. 2008; 94(11):1386–93
Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS, Carr JJ, Goldin JG, Greenland P, Guerci AD, Lima JA, Rader DJ, Rubin GD, Shaw LJ, Wiegers SE. 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
Dewey M, Hamm B. Cost-effectiveness of coronary angiography and calcium scoring using CT and stress MRI for diagnosis of coronary artery disease. EurRadiol 2007; 17:1301-1309.
Xu Y, Tang L, Zhu X, Xu H, Tang J, Yang Z, et al. Comparison of dual-source CT coronary angiography and conventional coronary angiography for detecting coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging.2010; 26(1):75–81.
Bax JJ, Inzucchi SE, Bonow RO, Schuijf JD, Freeman MR, Barrett EJ.Cardiac imaging for risk stratification in diabetes. Diabetes Care 2007; 30:1295-304.
Hamon M, Biondi-Zoccai GG, Malagutti P, et al. Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared with conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. J Am CollCardiol 2006; (48)1896 –910
Hamon M, Morello R, Riddell JW, Hamon M. Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography—meta-analysis.Radiology2007;245:720 –31
Mowatt G, Cummins E, Waugh N, Walker S, Cook J, Jia X, et al.A systemic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in the investigation of coronary artery disease.HealthTechnol Assess. 2008; 12(17):140-143.
Alex B. Meijer, Ying L. O, Jacob Geleijns and Lucia J. M. Kroft.MetaAnalysis of 40- and 64-MDCT Angiography for Assessing Coronary Artery Stenosis. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2008; 191: 1667-1675
Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, Arbab-Zadeh A, Niinuma H, Gottlieb
I, Paul N, Clouse ME, Shapiro EP, Hoe J, Lardo AC, Bush DE, de Roos A, Cox C, Brinker J, Lima JA. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008; 359:2324-36.
Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Vliegen HW, Salm LP, de Roos A, van der Wall EE. Noninvasive angiography and assessment of left ventricular function using multislice computed tomography in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004; 27:2905–291
Stein PD, Yaekoub AY, Matta F, Sostman HD. 64-slice CT for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 2008; 121:715-25.
Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, Goldstein JA. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am CollCardiol 2005; 46:552-7.
Dewey M, Vavere AL, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, Sara L, Cox C, Gottlieb I, Yoshioka K, Paul N, Hoe J, de Roos A, Lardo AC, Lima JA, Clouse ME. Patient characteristics as predictors of image quality and diagnostic accuracy of MDCT compared with conventional coronary angiography for detecting coronary artery stenoses: CORE-64 Multicenter International Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194:93-10
Manghat NE, Morgan-Hughes GJ, Broadley AJ, et al. 16-Detector row computed tomographic coronary angiography in patients undergoing evaluation for aortic valve replacement: comparison with catheter angiography. ClinRadiol 2006; 61:749 –57
Morin RL, Gerber TC, McCollough CH, et al. Radiation dose in computed tomography of the heart. Circulation 2003;107:917-922.
Vogl TJ, Abolmaali ND, Diebold T, Engelmann K, Ay M, Dogan S, Wimmer-Greinecker G, Moritz A, Herzog C. Techniques for the detection of coronary atherosclerosis: multi-detector row CT coronary angiography. Radiology 2002; 223:212-20
Namgung J, Choe H, Kwon SU, Doh JH, Lee SY, Hur G, Lee WR. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multidetector CT coronary angiography for the evaluation of coronary artery disease. Korean J Med 2008; 75:42-53.
Abdulla J, Abildstrom SZ, Gotzsche O, Christensen E, Kober L, TorpPedersen C. 64-Multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as a potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2007;28:3042–50.
Ferencik M, Nomura CH, Maurovich-Horvat P, et al. Quantitative parameters of image quality in 64-slice computed tomography angiography of the coronary arteries. Eur J Radiol 2006; 57:373–379
Pugliese F, Mollet NRA, Runza G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. EurRadiol 2006; 16:575–582
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
Gorenoi V, Schönermark MP, Hagen A. CT coronary angiography vs. invasive coronary angiography in CHD. GMS Health Technol Assess. 2012; 8:Doc02.
Published
2025-01-09
How to Cite
Hussein, K. M., & Ahmed Mahmood Hussein. (2025). Multi-Detector CT Coronary Angiography Accuracy in the Evaluation of Significant Coronary Arteries Stenosis versus Invasive Coronary Angiography Procedures. Central Asian Journal of Medical and Natural Science, 6(1), 262-269. Retrieved from https://cajmns.centralasianstudies.org/index.php/CAJMNS/article/view/2693
Section
Articles
