High diagnostic accuracy of prospective ECG-gating 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography for the detection of in-stent restenosis
The accuracy of computed tomography (CT) for assessment of coronary stents is as yet unproven and radiation exposure has been a concern. The aim of our study is to compare radiation dose and diagnostic performance of CT with prospective ECG-triggering versus retrospective ECG-triggering for the detection of in-stent restenosis (ISR).
We enrolled 168 consecutive patients with suspected ISR, 83 studied using CT with prospective ECG-triggering (group 1) and 85 using retrospective ECG-triggering (group 2).
Prevalence of ISR according to catheter angiography was 24% in both groups. The overall evaluability was similar (93% in group 1 vs 95% in group 2). Artefact sub-analysis showed a significantly lower number of blooming and higher number of slice misalignment in group 1 vs group 2. In the stent-based analysis using only evaluable stents, specificity, positive predictive value and accuracy were significantly higher in group 1 (100%, 100% and 99%, respectively) than in group 2 (97%, 91% and 95%, respectively, p < 0.05). Group 1 was exposed to a lower radiation dose compared with group 2 (4.3 ± 1.4 mSv vs 18.5 ± 5.5 mSv, p < 00.1).
CT with prospective ECG-triggering can improve diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive imaging of coronary stents with a significant reduction in radiation exposure
KeywordsComputed tomography Coronary stents Radiation dose Invasive coronary angiography In-stent restenosis Coronary arteries
- 6.Andreini D, Pontone G, Bartorelli AL et al (2009) Comparison of feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography versus invasive coronary angiography versus intravascular ultrasound for evaluation of in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 103:1349–1358PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Christner JA, Kofler JM, McCollough CH (2010) Estimating effective dose for CT using dose-length product compared with using organ doses: consequences of adopting international commission on radiological protection publication 103 or dual-energy scanning. Am J Roentgenol 194:881–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS et al (2006) 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 114:1761–1791PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar