The evolution and investigation of native coronary arteries in patients after coronary stent implantation: a study by 320-detector CT angiography

  • Yu-Hsiang Juan
  • Yu-Chieh Huang
  • Zhonghua Sun
  • I-Chang Hsieh
  • Wen-Hui Chan
  • Chun-Chi Chen
  • Kuo-Chun Hung
  • Ming-Shien Wen
  • Yung-Liang Wan
Original Paper

Abstract

To study the role of 320-detector coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) in assessing native coronary arteries in patients treated with coronary stents. 123 patients with coronary stenting received both CTA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) within 1 day. The clinical parameters, coronary calcium scoring, CTA and CCA were analyzed to determine the prevalence of significant stenosis of native coronary arteries (SSNCA), the predictive value of CTA and the factors correlating with SSNCA and newly developed SSNCA after stenting (NDSSNCAS), with CCA as the standard of reference, using both vessel-based analysis (VBA) and patient-based analysis (PBA). Both the source and the reconstructed images were analyzed by CTA. All native coronary arteries were interpretable independent of cardiac motion. CTA showed a sensitivity/specificity of 93.5 %/97.3 % and 92.5 %/92.5 % in diagnosing SSNCA in VBA and PBA, respectively. The significant factors related to SSNCA were higher calcium scores (P = 0.003), a higher serum glucose level (P = 0.048), a greater number of vessels without previous stent placement (P = 0.003) and fewer stents implanted within the vessels (P = 0.003). The risk factors showed no significant correlation from PBA on SSNCA or from NDSSNCAS on either VBA or PBA. CTA demonstrates excellent correlation with CCA. The prevalence of SSNCA is significantly correlated with the presence of higher calcium scores in the arteries, a higher serum glucose level, a greater number of vessels without previous stent placement and fewer stents implanted within the vessels; PBA on SSNCA and NDSSNCAS on both VBA and PBA showed no significance.

Keywords

Coronary artery stenosis Coronary computed tomography angiography Calcium score Coronary stents Native coronary artery 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a research grant from the National Science Council with a Grant Number NSC 99-2314-B-182-037-MY2.

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Schroeder S, Achenbach S, Bengel F, Burgstahler C, Cademartiri F, de Feyter P, George R, Kaufmann P, Kopp AF, Knuuti J, Ropers D, Schuijf J, Tops LF, Bax JJ, Working Group Nuclear C, Cardiac CT, European Society of C, European Council of Nuclear C (2008) 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 29(4):531–556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moulias A, Alexopoulos D (2011) Long-term outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention: the significance of native coronary artery disease progression. Clin Cardiol 34(10):588–592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cutlip DE, Chhabra AG, Baim DS, Chauhan MS, Marulkar S, Massaro J, Bakhai A, Cohen DJ, Kuntz RE, Ho KK (2004) Beyond restenosis: five-year clinical outcomes from second-generation coronary stent trials. Circulation 110(10):1226–1230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leon MB, Allocco DJ, Dawkins KD, Baim DS (2009) Late clinical events after drug-eluting stents: the interplay between stent-related and natural history-driven events. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2(6):504–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chacko R, Mulhearn M, Novack V, Novack L, Mauri L, Cohen SA, Moses J, Leon MB, Cutlip DE (2009) Impact of target lesion and nontarget lesion cardiac events on 5-year clinical outcomes after sirolimus-eluting or bare-metal stenting. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2(6):498–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alexopoulos D, Xanthopoulou I, Davlouros P, Damelou A, Mazarakis A, Chiladakis J, Hahalis G (2010) Mechanisms of nonfatal acute myocardial infarction late after stent implantation: the relative impact of disease progression, stent restenosis, and stent thrombosis. Am Heart J 159(3):439–445PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stone GW, Maehara A, Lansky AJ, de Bruyne B, Cristea E, Mintz GS, Mehran R, McPherson J, Farhat N, Marso SP, Parise H, Templin B, White R, Zhang Z, Serruys PW, Investigators P (2011) A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med 364(3):226–235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Graaf FR, van Velzen JE, Witkowska AJ, Schuijf JD, van der Bijl N, Kroft LJ, de Roos A, Reiber JH, Bax JJ, de Grooth GJ, Jukema JW, van der Wall EE (2011) Diagnostic performance of 320-slice multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography in patients after coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur Radiol 21(11):2285–2296PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elhendy A, van Domburg RT, Bax JJ, Nierop PR, Valkema R, Geleijnse ML, Kasprzak JD, Liqui-Lung AF, Cornel JH, Roelandt JR (1998) Dobutamine-atropine stress myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging in the diagnosis of graft stenosis after coronary artery bypass grafting. J Nucl Cardiol 5(5):491–497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    de Azevedo CF, Hadlich MS, Bezerra SG, Petriz JL, Alves RR, de Souza O, Rati M, Albuquerque DC, Moll J (2011) Prognostic value of CT angiography in patients with inconclusive functional stress tests. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 4(7):740–751PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD, Cramer MJ, Mollet NR, van Mieghem CA, Nieman K, van Werkhoven JM, Pundziute G, Weustink AC, de Vos AM, Pugliese F, Rensing B, Jukema JW, Bax JJ, Prokop M, Doevendans PA, Hunink MG, Krestin GP, de Feyter PJ (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 52(25):2135–2144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, Arbab-Zadeh A, Niinuma H, Gottlieb I, Paul N, Clouse ME, Shapiro EP, Hoe J, Lardo AC, Bush DE, de Roos A, Cox C, Brinker J, Lima JA (2008) Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 359(22):2324–2336PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Uehara M, Takaoka H, Kobayashi Y, Funabashi N (2013) Diagnostic accuracy of 320-slice computed-tomography for detection of significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with various heart rates and heart rhythms compared with conventional coronary-angiography. Int J Cardiol 167(3):809–815PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hsiao EM, Rybicki FJ, Steigner M (2010) CT coronary angiography: 256-slice and 320-detector row scanners. Curr Cardiol Rep 12(1):68–75PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Valentin J, International Commission on Radiation P (2007) Managing patient dose in multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT). ICRP Publication 102. Ann ICRP 37(1):1–79 iiiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lai HM, Holtzman D, Aronow WS, DeLuca AJ, Ahn C, Matayev S, Belkin RN (2012) Association of coronary artery calcium with severity of myocardial ischemia in left anterior descending, left circumflex, and right coronary artery territories. Clin Cardiol 35(1):61–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hamilton-Craig CR, Friedman D, Achenbach S (2012) Cardiac computed tomography–evidence, limitations and clinical application. Heart Lung Circ 21(2):70–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Taylor AJ, Bindeman J, Feuerstein I, Le T, Bauer K, Byrd C, Wu H, O’Malley PG (2008) Community-based provision of statin and aspirin after the detection of coronary artery calcium within a community-based screening cohort. J Am Coll Cardiol 51(14):1337–1341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, Gitter M, Sutherland J, Halamert E, Scherer M, Bellinger R, Martin A, Benton R, Delago A, Min JK (2008) 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 52(21):1724–1732PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hoffmann U, Nagurney JT, Moselewski F, Pena A, Ferencik M, Chae CU, Cury RC, Butler J, Abbara S, Brown DF, Manini A, Nichols JH, Achenbach S, Brady TJ (2006) Coronary multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of patients with acute chest pain. Circulation 114(21):2251–2260PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Choi EK, Choi SI, Rivera JJ, Nasir K, Chang SA, Chun EJ, Kim HK, Choi DJ, Blumenthal RS, Chang HJ (2008) Coronary computed tomography angiography as a screening tool for the detection of occult coronary artery disease in asymptomatic individuals. J Am Coll Cardiol 52(5):357–365PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rybicki FJ, Otero HJ, Steigner ML, Vorobiof G, Nallamshetty L, Mitsouras D, Ersoy H, Mather RT, Judy PF, Cai T, Coyner K, Schultz K, Whitmore AG, Di Carli MF (2008) Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 24(5):535–546PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Laynez-Carnicero A, Estornell-Erill J, Trigo-Bautista A, Valle-Munoz A, Nadal-Barange M, Romaguera-Torres R, Planas del Viejo A, Corbi-Pascual M, Paya-Serrano R, Ridocci-Soriano F (2010) Non-invasive assessment of coronary artery bypass grafts and native coronary arteries using 64-slice computed tomography: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. Rev Esp Cardiol 63(2):161–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schoenenberger AW, Jamshidi P, Kobza R, Zuber M, Stuck AE, Pfisterer M, Erne P (2010) Progression of coronary artery disease during long-term follow-up of the Swiss Interventional Study on Silent Ischemia Type II (SWISSI II). Clin Cardiol 33(5):289–295PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Borges JC, Lopes N, Soares PR, Góis AF, Stolf NA, Oliveira SA, Hueb WA, Ramires JA (2010) Five-year follow-up of angiographic disease progression after medicine, angioplasty, or surgery. J Cardiothorac Surg 26(5):91Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yu-Hsiang Juan
    • 1
  • Yu-Chieh Huang
    • 1
  • Zhonghua Sun
    • 2
  • I-Chang Hsieh
    • 3
  • Wen-Hui Chan
    • 1
  • Chun-Chi Chen
    • 3
  • Kuo-Chun Hung
    • 3
  • Ming-Shien Wen
    • 3
  • Yung-Liang Wan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, College of Medicine, Institute for Radiological ResearchChang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  2. 2.Discipline of Medical Imaging, Department of Imaging and Applied PhysicsCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Cardiology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, College of MedicineChang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan

Personalised recommendations