Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Adjunctive use of cardiac CT in the coronary intervention laboratory

  • Published:
Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cardiac CT is considered an appropriate diagnostic test for evaluation of symptomatic patients with low to intermediate pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease. A negative CT scan reliably rules out the presence of coronary artery disease, has a favorable prognostic value, and might therefore significantly impact the need for invasive coronary angiography. Patients with significant atherosclerotic disease on CT benefit from further functional assessment to decide upon the appropriate therapeutic approach. Beyond this gatekeeper function, cardiac CT overcomes the inherent two-dimensional limitations of the catheter-based approach and might be valuable as a complementary technique in patients with complex coronary artery disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Sones FM, Shirey EK, Proudfit WL, Westcott RN: Cine coronary arteriography. Circulation 1959, 20:773–775.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Moshage WE, Achenbach S, Seese B, et al.: Coronary artery stenoses: three-dimensional imaging with electrocardiographically triggered, contrast agent-enhanced, electron-beam CT. Radiology 1995, 196:707–714.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CA, Mollet NR, et al.: 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with high, intermediate, or low pretest probability of significant coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 50:1469–1475.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schroeder S, Achenbach S, Bengel F, et al.: Cardiac computed tomography: indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements: report of a Writing Group deployed by the Working Group Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2008, 29:531–556.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Abdulla J, Abildstrom SZ, Gotzsche O, et al.: 64-multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2007, 28:3042–3050.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al.: Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008, 359:2324–2336.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD, et al.: Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008, 52:2135–2144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, et al.: Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008, 52:1724–1732.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fox K, Garcia MA, Ardissino D, et al.: Guidelines on the management of stable angina pectoris: executive summary: the Task Force on the Management of Stable Angina Pectoris of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2006, 27:1341–1381.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lin GA, Dudley RA, Lucas FL, et al.: Frequency of stress testing to document ischemia prior to elective percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA 2008, 300:1765–1773.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Uretsky BF, Wang FW: Implementation and application of a continuous quality improvement (CQI) program for the cardiac catheterization laboratory: one institution’s 10-year experience. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2006, 68:586–595.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Togni M, Balmer F, Pfiffner D, et al.: Percutaneous coronary interventions in Europe 1992-2001. Eur Heart J 2004, 25:1208–1213.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sones FM Jr: Indications and value of coronary arteriography. Circulation 1972, 46:1155–1160.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, et al.: Stress myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography is clinically effective and cost effective in risk stratification of patients with a high likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD) but no known CAD. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 43:200–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Steinberg EH, Madmon L, Patel CP, et al.: Long-term prognostic significance of dobutamine echocardiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: results of a 5-year follow-up study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997, 29:969–973.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ragosta M, Bishop AH, Lipson LC, et al.: Comparison between angiography and fractional flow reserve versus single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging for determining lesion significance in patients with multivessel coronary disease. Am J Cardiol 2007, 99:896–902.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Elhendy A, van Domburg RT, Bax JJ, et al.: Accuracy of dobutamine technetium 99m sestamibi SPECT imaging for the diagnosis of single-vessel coronary artery disease: comparison with echocardiography. Am Heart J 2000, 139:224–230.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Min JK, Shaw LJ, Devereux RB, et al.: Prognostic value of multidetector coronary computed tomographic angiography for prediction of all-cause mortality. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 50:1161–1170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bluemke DA, Achenbach S, Budoff M, et al.: Noninvasive coronary artery imaging: magnetic resonance angiography and multidetector computed tomography angiography: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention of the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and the Councils on Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Disease in the Young. Circulation 2008, 118:586–606.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Silber S, Albertsson P, Aviles FF, et al.: Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2005, 26:804–847.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, et al.: Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: results from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial nuclear substudy. Circulation 2008, 117:1283–1291.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schuijf JD, Wijns W, Jukema JW, et al.: Relationship between noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006, 48:2508–2514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Meijboom WB, Van Mieghem CA, van Pelt N, et al.: Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery stenoses: computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography and correlation with fractional flow reserve in patients with stable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008, 52:636–643.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Berman DS, Kang X, Slomka PJ, et al.: Underestimation of extent of ischemia by gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with left main coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 2007, 14:521–528.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee DY, Eigler N, Luo H, et al.: Effect of intracoronary ultrasound imaging on clinical decision making. Am Heart J 1995, 129:1084–1093.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Yamashita T, Colombo A, Tobis JM: Limitations of coronary angiography compared with intravascular ultrasound: implications for coronary interventions. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1999, 42:91–138.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Berbarie RF, Dockery WD, Johnson KB, et al.: Use of multislice computed tomographic coronary angiography for the diagnosis of anomalous coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol 2006, 98:402–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bunce NH, Lorenz CH, Keegan J, et al.: Coronary artery anomalies: assessment with free-breathing three-dimensional coronary MR angiography. Radiology 2003, 227:201–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lemos PA, Serruys PW, van Domburg RT, et al.: Unrestricted utilization of sirolimus-eluting stents compared with conventional bare stent implantation in the “real world”: the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. Circulation 2004, 109:190–195.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Van Mieghem CA, Thury A, Meijboom WB, et al.: Detection and characterization of coronary bifurcation lesions with 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. Eur Heart J 2007, 28:1968–1976.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Fisher LD, Judkins MP, Lesperance J, et al.: Reproducibility of coronary arteriographic reading in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS). Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1982, 8:565–575.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Christofferson RD, Lehmann KG, Martin GV, et al.: Effect of chronic total coronary occlusion on treatment strategy. Am J Cardiol 2005, 95:1088–1091.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Puma JA, Sketch MH Jr, Tcheng JE, et al.: Percutaneous revascularization of chronic coronary occlusions: an overview. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995, 26:1–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mollet NR, Hoye A, Lemos PA, et al.: Value of preprocedure multislice computed tomographic coronary angiography to predict the outcome of percutaneous recanalization of chronic total occlusions. Am J Cardiol 2005, 95:240–243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Garcia-Garcia HM, van Mieghem CA, Gonzalo N, et al.: Computed tomography in total coronary occlusions (CTTO registry): radiation exposure and predictors of successful percutaneous intervention. EuroIntervention 2009, 4:607–616.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Patterson MS, Schotten J, van Mieghem C, et al.: Magnetic navigation in percutaneous coronary intervention. J Interv Cardiol 2006, 19:558–565.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Webb JG, Pasupati S, Humphries K, et al.: Percutaneous transarterial aortic valve replacement in selected high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Circulation 2007, 116:755–763.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Goldstein JA, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, et al.: A randomized controlled trial of multi-slice coronary computed tomography for evaluation of acute chest pain. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 49:863–871.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Brodoefel H, Reimann A, Burgstahler C, et al.: Noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography in an unselected patient collective: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability and coronary calcifications on image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Eur J Radiol 2007, 66:134–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Onuma Y, Tanabe K, Nakazawa G, et al.: Noncardiac findings in cardiac imaging with multidetector computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006, 48:402–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S: Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007, 298:317–323.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, et al.: Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. Eur Heart J 2008, 29:191–197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Berman DS, et al.: Task force 13: training in advanced cardiovascular imaging (computed tomography) endorsed by the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008, 51:409–414.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Weustink AC, Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, et al.: Reliable high-speed coronary computed tomography in symptomatic patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 50:786–794.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Leber AW, Johnson T, Becker A, et al.: Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source multi-slice CT-coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2007, 28:2354–2360.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Ropers U, Ropers D, Pflederer T, et al.: Influence of heart rate on the diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 50:2393–2398.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Alkadhi H, Scheffel H, Desbiolles L, et al.: Dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography: influence of obesity, calcium load, and heart rate on diagnostic accuracy. Eur Heart J 2008, 29:766–776.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Leschka S, et al.: Low-dose CT coronary angiography in the step-and-shoot mode: diagnostic performance. Heart 2008, 94:1132–1137.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Cardiology and Radiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Room Hs 207, PO BOX 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Carlos A. G. Van Mieghem

Authors
  1. Carlos A. G. Van Mieghem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steve Ramcharitar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pim J. de Feyter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos A. G. Van Mieghem.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Van Mieghem, C.A.G., Ramcharitar, S. & de Feyter, P.J. Adjunctive use of cardiac CT in the coronary intervention laboratory. curr cardiovasc imaging rep 2, 427–436 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-009-0054-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-009-0054-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation