Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Current and Future Applications of Coronary CT Angiography with and Without FFR in the Emergency Room

  • Spotlight on CT Imaging (T Schindler, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Multiple clinical trials have established the value of Coronary CT angiography (CCTA) for the evaluation of patients presenting to the ED with chest pain and a low to intermediate risk for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). CCTA can be used to evaluate these patients rapidly, effectively, and with relatively low cost and radiation dose.

Recent Findings

New research continues to accumulate, and despite much evidence to support its use in the ED setting, at least one recently published study has presented potentially contradictory results. Additionally, newer techniques that enhance the utility of CCTA, such as fractional flow reserve (FFR) and CT perfusion analysis have been developed and are becoming increasingly available. These applications provide important information about the hemodynamic significance of coronary lesions and are potentially useful in the ED setting to aid clinical decision making.

Summary

This review provides an update on the literature related to the use of CCTA in the ED, including a discussion of emerging advanced cardiac CT applications.

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

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

  1. Bhuiya FA, Pitts SR, McCaig LF. Emergency department visits for chest pain and abdominal pain: United States, 1999–2008. NCHS Data Brief. 2010;43:1–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Halpern EJ, Levin DC, Zhang S, et al. Comparison of image quality and arterial enhancement with a dedicated coronary CTA protocol versus a triple rule-out coronary CTA protocol. Acad Radiol. 2009;16:1039–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rahmani N, Jeudy J, White CS. Triple rule-out and dedicated coronary artery CTA: comparison of coronary artery image quality. Acad Radiol. 2009;16:604–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Madder RD, Raff GL, Hickman L, et al. Comparative diagnostic yield and 3-month outcomes of “triple rule-out” and standard protocol coronary CT angiography in the evaluation of acute chest pain. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5:165–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schertler T, Frauenfelder T, Stolzmann P, et al. Triple rule-out CT in patients with suspicion of acute pulmonary embolism: findings and accuracy. Acad Radiol. 2009;16:708–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Burris II AC, Boura JA, Raff GL, Chinnaiyan KM. Triple rule out versus coronary ct angiography in patients with acute chest pain: results from the ACIC Consortium. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2015;8(7):817–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Einstein AJ. Radiation risk from coronary artery disease imaging: how do different diagnostic tests compare? Heart. 2008;94:1519–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kontos MC, Jesse RL, Anderson FP, et al. Comparison of myocardial perfusion imaging and cardiac troponin I in patients admitted to the emergency department with chest pain. CIR. 1999;99(16):2073–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Kimura BJ, Bocchicchio M, Willis CL, et al. Screening cardiac ultrasonographic examination in patients with suspected cardiac disease in the emergency department. Am Heart J. 2001;142:324–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Horowitz RS, Morganroth J, Parrotto C, et al. Immediate diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction by two-dimensional echocardiography. Circulation. 1982;65:323–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Herzog BA, Wyss CA, Husmann L, et al. First head-to-head comparison of effective radiation dose from low-dose 64-slice CT with prospective ECG-triggering versus invasive coronary angiography. Heart. 2009;95:1656–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Laudon DA, Vukov LF, Breen JF, et al. Use of electron-beam computed tomography in the evaluation of chest pain patients in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 1999;33:15–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Georgiou D, Budoff MJ, Kaufer E, et al. Screening patients with chest pain in the emergency department using electron beam tomography: a follow-up study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:105–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McLaughlin VV, Balogh T, Rich S. Utility of electron beam computed tomography to stratify patients presenting to the emergency room with chest pain. Am J Cardiol. 1999;84:327–8. A8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, et al. Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990;15:827–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 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 

  17. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cury RC, Budoff M, Taylor AJ. Coronary CT angiography versus standard of care for assessment of chest pain in the emergency department. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2013;7:79–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 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  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Redberg RF, Coronary CT. Angiography for Acute Chest Pain. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:375–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sherwood MW, Newby LK. High-sensitivity troponin assays: evidence, indications, and reasonable use. J Am Heart Assoc. 2014;3:e000403. Recently published trial which demonstrated the use of hs-troponins led to improved time to discharge and thus blunted some of the benefits of CCTA.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Dedic A, Lubbers MM, Schaap J, et al. Coronary CT angiography for suspected ACS in the era of high-sensitivity troponins. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(1):16–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria. Acute Nonspecific Chest Pain — Low Probability of Coronary Artery Disease. 2015.

  24. American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria. Chronic Chest Pain — Low to Intermediate Probability of Coronary Artery Disease. 2012.

  25. Motoyama S, Sarai M, Harigaya H, et al. Computed tomographic angiography characteristics of atherosclerotic plaques subsequently resulting in acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:49–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pflederer T, Marwan M, Schepis T, et al. Characterization of culprit lesions in acute coronary syndromes using coronary dual-source CT angiography. Atherosclerosis. 2010;211(2):437–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Peels K, et al. Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:1703–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kern MJ, Samady H. Current concepts of integrated coronary physiology in the catheterization laboratory. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:173–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Min JK, Leipsic J, Pencina MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. JAMA. 2012;308(12):1237–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. 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(12):1145–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Douglas PS, Pontone G, Hlatky MA, et al. Clinical outcomes of fractional flow reserve by computed tomographic angiography-guided diagnostic strategies vs. usual care in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the prospective longitudinal trial of FFRCT: outcome and resource impacts study. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:3359–67. Recent clinical trial, which found that a workup utilizing FFRCT prevented a significant number of unnecessary ICAs with no increased risk of MACE.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Hlatky MA, De Bruyne B, Pontone G, et al. Quality of life and economic outcomes of assessing fractional flow reserve with computed tomography angiography: PLATFORM. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(21):2315–23. The PLATFORM trial, which demonstrated that evaluation strategies utilizing FFRCT resulted in lower resource utilization and cost within 90 days compared with traditional workups incorporating ICA. This method was also associated with greater improvements in quality of life when compared with other methods of noninvasive testing.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Raff G. Personal communication—stress perfusion CT and CTA-FFRct: applicable in the ED? 2016. Personal correspondence regarding emerging proprietary technology promising under one hour turnaround times for FFRCT. Thus, making FFRCT feasible in the acute setting.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Branch KR, Busey J, Mitsumori LM, et al. Diagnostic performance of resting CT myocardial perfusion in patients with possible acute coronary syndrome. Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:W450–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Rochitte CE, George RT, Chen MY, et al. Computed tomography angiography and perfusion to assess coronary artery stenosis causing perfusion defects by single photon emission computed tomography: the CORE320 study. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1120–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 S Greene St, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA

    Alan Ropp & Charles White

Authors
  1. Alan Ropp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charles White
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alan Ropp.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

AR and CW declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Spotlight on CT Imaging

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ropp, A., White, C. Current and Future Applications of Coronary CT Angiography with and Without FFR in the Emergency Room. Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep 9, 29 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-016-9391-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-016-9391-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation