Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

New Insights from Major Prospective Cohort Studies with Cardiac CT

  • Cardiac PET, CT, and MRI (SE Petersen, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Each year, 11 million patients present in the USA with new symptoms suggestive of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Most undergo stress testing but <10 % demonstrate myocardial ischemia. Moreover, up to 60 % will have CAD which adversely affects outcomes. Cardiac computed tomography (CCT) is being used increasingly as an alternative to stress testing to rule out obstructive CAD in symptomatic patients, and large cohort studies in asymptomatic patients have identified burden of coronary atherosclerosis as a predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). This review article will critically evaluate major clinical studies on the use of CCT in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients and discuss the lessons for the clinical use of CCT.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 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;52:1724–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cherry DK, Woodwell DA, Rechtsteiner EA. National ambulatory medical care survey: 2005 summary. Advance data. 2007; 1–39.

  3. Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row ct. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2324–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, et al. 2012 accf/aha/acp/aats/pcna/scai/sts guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: executive summary. JAC. 2012;60:2564–603.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Diamond GA, Forrester JS. Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1979;300:1350–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cheng VY, Berman DS, Rozanski A, et al. Performance of the traditional age, sex, and angina typicality-based approach for estimating pretest probability of angiographically significant coronary artery disease in patients undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography: results from the multinational coronary ct angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: an international multicenter registry (confirm). Circulation. 2011;124:2423–32.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gibbons RJ, Balady GJ, Bricker JT, et al. Acc/aha 2002 guideline update for exercise testing: summary article. A report of the American College Of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (committee to update the 1997 exercise testing guidelines). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1531–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 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;42:1318–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cheitlin MD, Armstrong WF, Aurigemma GP, et al. Acc/aha/ase 2003 guideline update for the clinical application of echocardiography: summary article: a report of the American College Of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (acc/aha/ase committee to update the 1997 guidelines for the clinical application of echocardiography). Circulation. 2003;108:1146–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Roger VL, Pellikka PA, Bell MR, et al. Sex and test verification bias. Impact on the diagnostic value of exercise echocardiography. Circulation. 1997;95:405–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Miller TD, Hodge DO, Christian TF, et al. Effects of adjustment for referral bias on the sensitivity and specificity of single photon emission computed tomography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Am J Med. 2002;112:290–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ladapo JA, Blecker S, Elashoff MR, et al. Clinical implications of referral bias in the diagnostic performance of exercise testing for coronary artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2:e000505.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:886–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rozanski A, Gransar H, Hayes SW, et al. Temporal trends in the frequency of inducible myocardial ischemia during cardiac stress testing: 1991 to 2009. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1054–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cho I, Chang HJ, Sung JM, et al. Coronary computed tomographic angiography and risk of all-cause mortality and nonfatal myocardial infarction in subjects without chest pain syndrome from the confirm registry (coronary ct angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: an international multicenter registry). Circulation. 2012;126:304–13. This is one of the largest cohort studies which describes the prognostic value of CCTA in stable chest pain.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Janne d’Othee B, Siebert U, Cury R, et al. A systematic review on diagnostic accuracy of ct-based detection of significant coronary artery disease. Eur J Radiol. 2008;65:449–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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;52:2135–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Stehli J, Fuchs TA, Bull S, et al. Accuracy of coronary ct angiography using a submillisievert fraction of radiation exposure: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:772–80. This trial evaluated the accuracy of CCTA to detect obstructive CAD.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Min JK, Leipsic J, Pencina MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic ct angiography. JAMA : J Am Med Assoc. 2012;308:1237–45.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Norgaard BL, Leipsic J, Gaur S, et al. Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in suspected coronary artery disease: the nxt trial (analysis of coronary blood flow using ct angiography: next steps). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1145–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hoffmann U, Bamberg F, Chae CU, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography for early triage of patients with acute chest pain: the romicat (rule out myocardial infarction using computer assisted tomography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1642–50. This trial is a large prospective cohort study evaluating the role of CCTA in acute chest pain.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Goldstein JA, Chinnaiyan KM, Abidov A, et al. The ct-stat (coronary computed tomographic angiography for systematic triage of acute chest pain patients to treatment) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1414–22. This trial compared CCTA with standard of care in acute chest pain.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hoffmann U, Truong QA, Schoenfeld DA, et al. Coronary ct angiography versus standard evaluation in acute chest pain. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:299–308.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Litt HI, Gatsonis C, Snyder B, et al. Ct angiography for safe discharge of patients with possible acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1393–403.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ahmadi N, Nabavi V, Hajsadeghi F, et al. Mortality incidence of patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease diagnosed by computed tomography angiography. Am J Cardiol. 2011;107:10–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hadamitzky M, Distler R, Meyer T, et al. Prognostic value of coronary computed tomographic angiography in comparison with calcium scoring and clinical risk scores. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:16–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 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;50:1161–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pundziute G, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:62–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schlett CL, Banerji D, Siegel E, et al. Prognostic value of ct angiography for major adverse cardiac events in patients with acute chest pain from the emergency department: 2-year outcomes of the romicat trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:481–91.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. van Werkhoven JM, Schuijf JD, Gaemperli O, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography and gated single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:623–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bamberg F, Sommer WH, Hoffmann V, et al. Meta-analysis and systematic review of the long-term predictive value of assessment of coronary atherosclerosis by contrast-enhanced coronary computed tomography angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:2426–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hulten EA, Carbonaro S, Petrillo SP, et al. Prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1237–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Al-Mallah MH, Qureshi W, Lin FY, et al. Does coronary ct angiography improve risk stratification over coronary calcium scoring in symptomatic patients with suspected coronary artery disease? Results from the prospective multicenter international confirm registry. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15:267–74. This trial evaluated the prognostic value of CCTA in stable chest pain.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Abdulla J, Asferg C, Kofoed KF. Prognostic value of absence or presence of coronary artery disease determined by 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;27:413–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Schlett CL, Banerji D, Siegel E, et al. Prognostic value of ct angiography for major adverse cardiac events in patients with acute chest pain from the emergency department: 2-year outcomes of the romicat trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2011;4:481–91. This trial evaluated the prognostic value of CCTA in acute chest pain.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Arad Y, Goodman KJ, Roth M, et al. Coronary calcification, coronary disease risk factors, c-reactive protein, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events: the St. Francis heart study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:158–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M, Hofman A, et al. Coronary calcification improves cardiovascular risk prediction in the elderly. Circulation. 2005;112:572–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Detrano R, Guerci AD, Carr JJ, et al. Coronary calcium as a predictor of coronary events in four racial or ethnic groups. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:1336–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yeboah J, McClelland RL, Polonsky TS, et al. Comparison of novel risk markers for improvement in cardiovascular risk assessment in intermediate-risk individuals. JAMA. 2012;308:788–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Polonsky TS, McClelland RL, Jorgensen NW, et al. Coronary artery calcium score and risk classification for coronary heart disease prediction. JAMA : J Am Med Assoc. 2010;303:1610–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. 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;114:1761–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU, et al. Accf/aha/ase/asnc/hfsa/hrs/scai/scct/scmr/sts 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College Of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:380–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Ridker PM, Pradhan A, MacFadyen JG, et al. Cardiovascular benefits and diabetes risks of statin therapy in primary prevention: an analysis from the Jupiter trial. Lancet. 2012;380:565–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Udo Hoffmann has received grant support from NIH/NHLBI.

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

ᅟ

Conflict of Interest

Sumbal A. Janjua declares no conflict of interest. Udo Hoffmann reports grants from Siemens Healthcare, American College of Radiology Imaging Network, and HeartFlow Inc.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All studies performed by the authors included in this review have been approved by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee and have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Cardiac CT/PET/MR, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 400, Boston, MA, 02114, USA

    Sumbal A. Janjua & Udo Hoffmann

Authors
  1. Sumbal A. Janjua
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Udo Hoffmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Udo Hoffmann.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Cardiac PET, CT, and MRI

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Janjua, S.A., Hoffmann, U. New Insights from Major Prospective Cohort Studies with Cardiac CT. Curr Cardiol Rep 17, 19 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-015-0571-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-015-0571-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation