Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nuclear cardiology will remain the “gatekeeper” over CT angiography

  • Editorial Point of View
  • Published:
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology Aims and scope

An Erratum to this article was published on 01 November 2007

Conclusion

Although CTA is a promising new modality, from an evidence-based point of view there is no data to support its use in a testing strategy, its accuracy is unlikely to be sufficiently similar to invasive catheterization to be considered its equivalent, and most importantly, it appears that stress perfusion data will be needed to select which patients may most benefit from revascularization and, hence, referral to the catheterization laboratory.

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

References

  1. Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, Fisher LD, Takaro T, Kennedy JW, et al. Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration [published erratum appears in Lancet 1994;344:1446]. Lancet 1994; 344:563–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Califf RM, Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Rankin JS, Hlatky MA, Mark DB, et al. The evolution of medical and surgical therapy for coronary artery disease. A 15-year perspective. JAMA 1989;261: 2077–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mark DB, Nelson CL, Califf RM, Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Jones RH, et al. Continuing evolution of therapy for coronary artery disease. Initial results from the era of coronary angioplasty. Circulation 1994;89:2015–25.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, Hartigan PM, Maron DJ, Kostuk WJ, et al. COURAGE Trial Research Group Optimal medical therapy with or without PCl for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1503–16.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hutter AM. Is there a left main equivalent? Circulation 1980;62: 207–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Smith LR, Harrell FEJr, Rankin JS, Califf RM, Pryor DB, Muhlbaier LH, et al. Determinants of early versus late cardiac death in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Circulation 1991;84(Suppl):II1245–53.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Califf RM, Phillips HR III, Hindman MC, Mark DB, Lee KL, Behar VS, et al. Prognostic value of a coronary artery jeopardy score. J Am Coll Cardiol 1985;5:1055–63.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, Becker A, Nikolaou K, Paul S, et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:147–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuettner A, Trabold T, Schroeder S, Feyer A, Beck T, Brueckner A, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary lesions using 16-detector multislice spiral computed tomography technology initial clinical results. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1230–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Garcia MJ, Lessick JL, Hoffmann MHK: CATSCAN Study Investigators. Accuracy of 16-row multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis. JAMA 2006;296:403–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Di Carli MF, Hachamovitch R. New technology for noninvasive evaluation of coronary artery disease. Circulation 2007;115:1464–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Achenbach, S., Daniel WG. Reply [letter]. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:891–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, Marwick TH, Lauer MS, Heller GV, et al. The economic consequences of available diagnostic and prognostic strategies for the evaluation of stable angina patients: an observational assessment of the value of precatheterization ischemia. Economics of Noninvasive Diagnosis (END) Multicenter Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:661–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Berman DS, Hachamovitch R, Shaw LJ, Germano G, Hayes S. Nuclear cardiology. In: Fuster V, Alexander RW, King S, O’Rourke RA, Wellens HJJ, editors, Hurst’s the heart. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2004. p. 525–65.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Weiner DA, Ryan TJ, McCabe CH, Chaitman BR, Sheffield LT, Fisher LD, et al. The role of exercise testing in identifying patients with improved survival after coronary artery bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 1986;8:741–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Weiner DA, Ryan TJ, McCabe CH, Chaitman BR, Sheffield LT, Fisher LD, et al. Value of exercise testing in determining the risk classification and the response to coronary artery bypass grafting in three-vessel coronary artery disease: a report from the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry. Am J Cardiol 1987;60: 262–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS. Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 2003;107:2900–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hachamovitch R, Hayes S, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS, Relative role of inducible ischemia versus ejection fraction in the prediction of survival benefit with revascularization compared to medical therapy in patients with no prior revascularization under-going stress myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:768–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Borges-Neto S, Shaw LK, Tuttle RH, Alexander JH, Smith WT, Chambless M, et al. Incremental prognostic power of single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 2005;95:182–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kern MJ, Lerman A, Bech JW, De Bruyne B, Beckhout E, Fearon WF, et al. Physiological assessment of coronary artery disease in the cardiac catheterization laboratory: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization. Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation 2006;114:1321–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bech GJ, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, de Muinck ED, Hoorntje JCA, Escaned J, et al. Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis: a randomized trial. Circulation 2001;103:2928–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manahoran G, Boersma E, Bech JW, van’t Veer M, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2105–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bech GJ, Droste H, Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Bonnier JJ, Michels HR, et al. Value of fractional flow reserve in making decisions about bypass surgery for equivocal left main coronary artery disease. Heart 2001;86:547–52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Chamuleau SAJ, Meuwissen M, Koch KT, van Eck-Smit BLF, Tio RA, Tijssen JGP, et al. Usefulness of fractional flow reserve for risk stratification of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and an intermediate stenosis. Am J Cardiol 2002;89:377–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ragosta M, Bishop AH, Lipson LC, Watson DD, Gimple LW, Sarembock IJ, 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 

  26. Miller DD, Coronary flow studies for risk stratification in multivessel disease. A physiologic bridge too far? J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:859–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hachamovitch R, Hayes S, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Shaw LJ, Germano G, et al. Determinants of risk and its temporal variation in patients with normal stress myocardial perfusion scans: what is the warranty period of a normal scan? J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:1329–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. He ZX, Hedrick TD, Pratt CM, Verani MS, Aquino V, Roberts R, et al. Severity of coronary artery calcification by electron beam computed tomography predicts silent myocardial ischemia. Circulation 2000;101:244–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Morrow DA, Gersh BJ, Braunwald E. Chronic coronary artery disease. In: Zipes DP, Libby P, Bonow R, Brainwald E, editors. Braunwald’s heart disease: a textbook of cardiovascular medicine 7th ed. New York: Saunders; 2004. p. 1281–1335.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Dorbala S, Hachamovitch R, Di Carli MF. Myocardial perfusion imaging and multidetector computed tomographic coronary angiography: appropriate for all patients with suspected coronary artery disease? J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2515–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Cardiology, New York, NY, USA

    Rory Hachamovitch

  2. Division of Nuclear Medicine/PET, Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass, USA

    Marcelo F. Di Carli

  3. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass, USA

    Marcelo F. Di Carli

Authors
  1. Rory Hachamovitch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marcelo F. Di Carli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rory Hachamovitch.

Additional information

An erratum to this article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2007.10.002.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hachamovitch, R., Di Carli, M.F. Nuclear cardiology will remain the “gatekeeper” over CT angiography. J Nucl Cardiol 14, 634–644 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2007.06.118

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2007.06.118

Search

Navigation