Informative value of clinical research on multislice computed tomography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: A systematic review

An exemplary reanalysis of coronary computed tomography angiography diagnostic meta-analyses shows insufficient data sharing and incorrect sensitivity and specificity estimates

OBJECTIVES

To systematically evaluate the reproducibility of primary data and, the reproducibility and correctness of pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates reported in a sample of diagnostic meta-analyses.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted an exemplary systematic review of diagnostic meta-analyses comparing coronary computed tomography angiography to invasive coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. The objectives were to assess 1) the reproducibility of contingency tables, 2) the reproducibility of pooled sensitivity and specificity, and 3) differences to reported results when applying a recommended bivariate binomial model for pooling sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, we reproduced the contingency tables and recalculated sensitivity and specificity by utilizing both the pooling method of each meta-analysis and a bivariate binomial model. We used linear trends to assess the improvement of these objectives over time.

RESULTS

We identified 38 diagnostic meta-analyses, each including on average 19 primary studies (range: 3 to 89 studies; total: 715-including duplicates) with an average of approximately 1800 patients per meta-analysis (range: 118 to 7516 patients). For 31 meta-analyses (82%, 95% CI: 65%, 91%), the contingency tables were reproducible; however, only 15 published them. Using the pooling method of each meta-analysis, we obtained comparable recalculated sensitivities/specificities for 28 meta-analyses (74% [57%, 86%]). Only 11 meta-analyses pooled sensitivity/specificity using a bivariate binomial model (29% [16%, 46%]). When all meta-analyses were pooled with this model, published sensitivities/specificities were confirmed for 19 of 38 meta-analyses (50% [34%, 66%]). There was only marginal improvement in data availability and application of recommended pooling methods over time.

CONCLUSION

Data sharing should become standard practice along with the use of appropriate pooling methods. Journal publication requirements may play a key role in enhancing the quality of scientific reporting and methodological standards which may lead to more reliable and consistent outcomes. The ability to reproduce sensitivity and specificity estimates in diagnostic imaging meta-analyses is dependent on the availability of contingency tables and the explicit reporting of pooling methods and software used.

Computed tomography coronary angiography in asymptomatic patients

PURPOSE

This study assessed the accuracy of computed tomography coronary angiography (CT-CA) for detecting significant coronary artery disease (CAD; ≥50% lumen reduction) in intermediate/high-risk asymptomatic patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 183 consecutive asymptomatic individuals (92 men; mean age 54±11 years) with more than one major risk factor (obesity, hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, family history, smoking) and an inconclusive or nonfeasible noninvasive stress test result (stress electrocardiography, stress echocardiography, nuclear stress scintigraphy) underwent CT-CA in an outpatient setting. All patients underwent conventional coronary angiography (CAG) within 4 weeks. Data from CT-CA were compared with CAG regarding the presence of significant CAD (≥50% lumen reduction).

RESULTS

Mean calcium score was 177±432, mean heart rate during the CT-CA scan was 58±8 bpm and the prevalence (per-patient) of obstructive CAD was 19%. CT-CA showed single-vessel CAD in 9% of patients, two-vessel CAD in 9% and three-vessel CAD in 0%. Per-patient sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CT-CA were 100% (90-100), 98% (96-99), 97% (85-99), 100% (97-100), respectively. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 151 and 0, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

CT-CA is an excellent noninvasive imaging modality for excluding significant CAD in intermediate/ high-risk asymptomatic patients with inconclusive or nonfeasible noninvasive stress test.

A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in the investigation of suspected coronary artery disease

Background

This systematic review summarized recent evidence pertaining to the clinical effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography (CTA) in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). If CTA proves to be a successful diagnostic performance measure, it could prevent the use of invasive diagnostic procedures in some patients. This would provide multiple health and cost benefits, particularly for under resourced areas where invasive coronary angiography is not always available.

Methods

A systematic method of literature searching and selection was employed with searches limited to December 2006 to March 2009. Included studies were quality assessed using National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) diagnostic levels of evidence and a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tool. Individual and pooled diagnostic performance measures were calculated using standard meta-analytic techniques at the patient, vessel and segment level. A positive result was defined as greater than or equal to 50% stenosis.

Results

Twenty-eight studies were included in the systematic review examining 3,674 patients. The primary meta-analysis at the patient-level indicated a sensitivity of 98.2% and specificity of 81.6%. The median (range) positive predictive value (PPV) was 90.5% (76%-100%) and negative predictive value (NPV) 99.0% (83%-100%). In all vessels, the pooled sensitivity was 94.9%, specificity 89.5%, and median (range) PPV 75.0% (53%-95%) and NPV 99.0% (93%-100%). At the individual artery level, overall diagnostic accuracy appeared to be slightly higher in the left main coronary artery and slightly lower in the left anterior descending and circumflex artery. In all segments, the sensitivity was 91.3%, specificity 94.0% and median (range) PPV 69.0% (44%-86%) and NPV 99.0% (98%-100%).

Conclusions

The high sensitivity indicates that CTA can effectively identify the majority of patients with significant coronary artery stenosis. The high NPV at the patient, vessel and segment level establishes CTA as an effective non-invasive alternative to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) for the exclusion of stenosis.

Cardiac Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Imaging Accurately Detects Anatomically and Functionally Significant Coronary Artery Disease

Background— Computed tomography (CT) is increasingly used to detect coronary artery disease, but the evaluation of stenoses is often uncertain. Perfusion imaging has an established role in detecting ischemia and guiding therapy. Hybrid positron emission tomography (PET)/CT allows combination angiography and perfusion imaging in short, quantitative, low-radiation-dose protocols.

Methods and Results— We enrolled 107 patients with an intermediate (30% to 70%) pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease. All patients underwent PET/CT (quantitative PET with 15 O-water and CT angiography), and the results were compared with the gold standard, invasive angiography, including measurement of fractional flow reserve when appropriate. Although PET and CT angiography alone both demonstrated 97% negative predictive value, CT angiography alone was suboptimal in assessing the severity of stenosis (positive predictive value, 81%). Perfusion imaging alone could not always separate microvascular disease from epicardial stenoses, but hybrid PET/CT significantly improved this accuracy to 98%. The radiation dose of the combined PET and CT protocols was 9.3 mSv (86 patients) with prospective triggering and 21.8 mSv (21 patients) with spiral CT.

Conclusion— Cardiac hybrid PET/CT imaging allows accurate noninvasive detection of coronary artery disease in a symptomatic population. The method is feasible and can be performed routinely with <10 mSv in most patients.

Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00627172.

Low dose CT of the heart: a quantum leap into a new era of cardiovascular imaging

In 10 years, computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) has shifted from an investigational tool to clinical reality. Even though CT technologies are very advanced and widely available, a large body of evidence supporting the clinical role of CTCA is missing. The reason is that the speed of technological development has outpaced the ability of the scientific community to demonstrate the clinical utility of the technique. In addition, with each new CT generation, there is a further broadening of actual and potential applications. In this review we examine the state of the art on CTCA. In particular, we focus on issues concerning technological development, radiation dose, implementation, training and organisation.

Coronary calcium score and computed tomography coronary angiography in high-risk asymptomatic subjects: assessment of diagnostic accuracy and prevalence of non-obstructive coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to compare the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) and computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) for the assessment of non-obstructive/obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in high-risk asymptomatic subjects.

METHODS

Two hundred and thirteen consecutive asymptomatic subjects (113 male; mean age 53.6 +/- 12.4 years) with more than one risk factor and an inconclusive or unfeasible non-invasive stress test result underwent CACS and CTCA in an outpatient setting. All patients underwent conventional coronary angiography (CAG). Data from CACS (threshold for positive image: Agatston score 1/100/1,000) and CTCA were compared with CAG regarding the degree of CAD (non-obstructive/obstructive; </>or=50% lumen reduction).

RESULTS

The mean calcium score was 151 +/- 403 and the prevalence of obstructive CAD was 17% (8% one-vessel and 10% two-vessel disease). Per-patient sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of CACS were: 97%, 75%, 45%, and 100%, respectively (Agatston >or=1); 73%, 90%, 60%, and 94%, respectively (Agatston >or=100); 30%, 98%, 79%, and 87%, respectively (Agatston >or=1,000). Per-patient values for CTCA were 100%, 98%, 97%, and 100%, respectively (p < 0.05). CTCA detected 65% prevalence of all CAD (48% non-obstructive), while CACS detected 37% prevalence of all CAD (21% non-obstructive) (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

CACS proved inadequate for the detection of obstructive and non-obstructive CAD compared with CTCA. CTCA has a high diagnostic accuracy for the detection of non-obstructive and obstructive CAD in high-risk asymptomatic patients with inconclusive or unfeasible stress test results.