Advertisement

CT: Patient Selection

  • Steve W. LeungEmail author
  • Marcus Y. Chen
Chapter

Abstract

Proper patient selection is extremely important in all diagnostic testing. The potential benefit should outweigh the risk of the test. With cardiac CT, valuable information regarding coronary arteries and cardiac anatomy can be rapidly obtained in a non-invasive manner. Appropriate use criteria documents have been developed to help guide practitioners on whether a test is likely to be beneficial in making the correct diagnosis, providing prognostic information, or obtaining vital information prior to invasive procedures. Despite these potential benefits, there are risks related to cardiac CT including radiation and contrast agents, which should be minimized as much as possible. There are also patient factors that can influence the diagnostic quality of the cardiac CT exam, which can render the exam uninterpretable and not beneficial. Careful patient selection will help improve the benefit to risk ratio and maximize the usefulness of cardiac CT.

Keywords

Cardiac CT Radiation Appropriate use Coronary artery angiography 

Abbreviations

ARVD

Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia

CACS

Coronary artery calcium scoring

CAD

Coronary artery disease

CT

Computed tomography

CTA

Computed tomography angiography

ECG

Electrocardiogram

LAD

Left anterior descending artery

PCI

Percutaneous coronary intervention

References

  1. 1.
    Blaha M, Budoff MJ, Shaw LJ, Khosa F, Rumberger JA, Berman D, et al. Absence of coronary artery calcification and all-cause mortality. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(6):692–700.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Patel J, Blaha MJ, McEvoy JW, Qadir S, Tota-Maharaj R, Shaw LJ, et al. All-cause mortality in asymptomatic persons with extensive Agatston scores above 1000. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8(1):26–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nasir K, Rubin J, Blaha MJ, Shaw LJ, Blankstein R, Rivera JJ, et al. Interplay of coronary artery calcification and traditional risk factors for the prediction of all-cause mortality in asymptomatic individuals. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5(4):467–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greenland P, Alpert JS, Beller GA, Benjamin EJ, Budoff MJ, Fayad ZA, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA guideline for assessment of cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(25):e50–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McClelland RL, Chung H, Detrano R, Post W, Kronmal RA. Distribution of coronary artery calcium by race, gender, and age: results from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circulation. 2006;113(1):30–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim YJ, Hur J, Lee HJ, Chang HJ, Nam JE, Hong YJ, et al. Meaning of zero coronary calcium score in symptomatic patients referred for coronary computed tomographic angiography. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;13(9):776–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brown SJ, Hayball MP, Coulden RA. Impact of motion artefact on the measurement of coronary calcium score. Br J Radiol. 2000;73(873):956–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, Arbab-Zadeh A, Niinuma H, Gottlieb I, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(22):2324–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, Gitter M, Sutherland J, Halamert E, 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(21):1724–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU, Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Kramer CM, 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(4):380–406.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mak GS, Truong QA. Cardiac CT: imaging of and through cardiac devices. Curr Cardiovas Imaging Rep. 2012;5(5):328–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rochitte CE, George RT, Chen MY, Arbab-Zadeh A, Dewey M, Miller JM, 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(17):1120–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, Kitagawa K, Chang HJ, Bluemke DA, et al. Adenosine stress 64- and 256-row detector computed tomography angiography and perfusion imaging: a pilot study evaluating the transmural extent of perfusion abnormalities to predict atherosclerosis causing myocardial ischemia. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(3):174–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brar SS, Shen AY, Jorgensen MB, Kotlewski A, Aharonian VJ, Desai N, et al. Sodium bicarbonate vs sodium chloride for the prevention of contrast medium-induced nephropathy in patients undergoing coronary angiography: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2008;300(9):1038–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Briguori C, Airoldi F, D’Andrea D, Bonizzoni E, Morici N, Focaccio A, et al. Renal Insufficiency Following Contrast Media Administration Trial (REMEDIAL): a randomized comparison of 3 preventive strategies. Circulation. 2007;115(10):1211–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Merten GJ, Burgess WP, Gray LV, Holleman JH, Roush TS, Kowalchuk GJ, et al. Prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy with sodium bicarbonate: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;291(19):2328–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Investigators ACT. Acetylcysteine for prevention of renal outcomes in patients undergoing coronary and peripheral vascular angiography: main results from the randomized Acetylcysteine for Contrast-induced nephropathy Trial (ACT). Circulation. 2011;124(11):1250–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kay J, Chow WH, Chan TM, Lo SK, Kwok OH, Yip A, et al. Acetylcysteine for prevention of acute deterioration of renal function following elective coronary angiography and intervention: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003;289(5):553–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marenzi G, Assanelli E, Marana I, Lauri G, Campodonico J, Grazi M, et al. N-acetylcysteine and contrast-induced nephropathy in primary angioplasty. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(26):2773–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Han Y, Zhu G, Han L, Hou F, Huang W, Liu H, et al. Short-term rosuvastatin therapy for prevention of contrast-induced acute kidney injury in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(1):62–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leoncini M, Toso A, Maioli M, Tropeano F, Villani S, Bellandi F. Early high-dose rosuvastatin for contrast-induced nephropathy prevention in acute coronary syndrome: results from the PRATO-ACS Study (Protective Effect of Rosuvastatin and Antiplatelet Therapy On contrast-induced acute kidney injury and myocardial damage in patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(1):71–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    National Research Council (U.S.). Committee to assess health risks from exposure to low level of ionizing radiation. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006. p. xvi. 406 p.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Halliburton SS, Abbara S, Chen MY, Gentry R, Mahesh M, Raff GL, et al. SCCT guidelines on radiation dose and dose-optimization strategies in cardiovascular CT. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5(4):198–224.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, Mark D, Min J, O’Gara P, et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate Use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2010;4(6):407.e1–33.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, Bairey Merz CN, Blum CB, Eckel RH, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2014;129(25 Suppl 2):S1–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, Hartigan PM, Maron DJ, Kostuk WJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(15):1503–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wever-Pinzon O, Romero J, Kelesidis I, Wever-Pinzon J, Manrique C, Budge D, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography for the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy: a meta-analysis of prospective trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(19):1992–2004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Douglas PS, Hoffmann U, Lee KL, Mark DB, Al-Khalidi HR, Anstrom K, et al. PROspective multicenter imaging study for evaluation of chest pain: rationale and design of the PROMISE trial. Am Heart J. 2014;167(6):796–803.e1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Goldstein JA, Chinnaiyan KM, Abidov A, Achenbach S, Berman DS, Hayes SW, 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(14):1414–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goldstein JA, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, Ross MA, O’Neil BJ, Raff GL. A randomized controlled trial of multi-slice coronary computed tomography for evaluation of acute chest pain. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(8):863–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Litt HI, Gatsonis C, Snyder B, Singh H, Miller CD, Entrikin DW, et al. CT angiography for safe discharge of patients with possible acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(15):1393–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Seifarth H, Raupach R, Schaller S, Fallenberg EM, Flohr T, Heindel W, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stents using 16-slice MDCT angiography: evaluation of a dedicated reconstruction kernel and a noise reduction filter. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(4):721–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ehara M, Kawai M, Surmely JF, Matsubara T, Terashima M, Tsuchikane E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary in-stent restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(9):951–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McFalls EO, Ward HB, Moritz TE, Goldman S, Krupski WC, Littooy F, et al. Coronary-artery revascularization before elective major vascular surgery. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(27):2795–804.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kato R, Lickfett L, Meininger G, Dickfeld T, Wu R, Juang G, et al. Pulmonary vein anatomy in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: lessons learned by use of magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation. 2003;107(15):2004–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jongbloed MR, Bax JJ, Lamb HJ, Dirksen MS, Zeppenfeld K, van der Wall EE, et al. Multislice computed tomography versus intracardiac echocardiography to evaluate the pulmonary veins before radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a head-to-head comparison. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45(3):343–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Achenbach S, Delgado V, Hausleiter J, Schoenhagen P, Min JK, Leipsic JA. SCCT expert consensus document on computed tomography imaging before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)/transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2012;6(6):366–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jilaihawi H, Kashif M, Fontana G, Furugen A, Shiota T, Friede G, et al. Cross-sectional computed tomographic assessment improves accuracy of aortic annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and reduces the incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59(14):1275–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Marcus FI, McKenna WJ, Sherrill D, Basso C, Bauce B, Bluemke DA, et al. Diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia: proposed modification of the task force criteria. Circulation. 2010;121(13):1533–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Departments of Medicine and RadiologyUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  2. 2.Cardiovascular and Pulmonary BranchNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations