Background

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold standard for determining lesion-specific ischemia. Computed FFRCT derived from coronary CT angiography (coronary CTA) correlates well with invasive FFR and accurately differentiates between ischemia-producing and nonischemic lesions. The diagnostic performance of FFRCT when applied in a clinically relevant way to all vessels ≥ 2 mm in diameter stratified by sex and age has not been previously examined.

Methods

Two hundred fifty-two patients and 407 vessels underwent coronary CTA, FFRCT, invasive coronary angiography, and invasive FFR. FFRCT and FFR ≤ 0.80 were considered ischemic, whereas CT stenosis ≥ 50% was considered obstructive. The diagnostic performance of FFRCT was assessed following a prespecified clinical use rule which included all vessels ≥ 2 mm in diameter, not just those assessed by invasive FFR measurements. Stenoses <30% were assigned an FFR of 0.90, and stenoses >90% were assigned an FFR of 0.50. Diagnostic performance of FFRCT was stratified by vessel diameter, sex, and age.

Results

By FFR, ischemia was identified in 129 of 252 patients (51%) and in 151 of 407 vessels (31%). Mean age (± standard deviation) was 62.9 ± 9 years, and women were older (65.5 vs 61.9 years; P = .003). Per-patient diagnostic accuracy (83% vs 72%; P < .005) and specificity (54% vs 82%, P < .001) improved significantly after application of the clinical use tool. These were significantly improved over standard coronary CTA values before application of the clinical use rule. Discriminatory power of FFRCT also increased compared with baseline (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC]: 0.93 vs 0.81, P < .001). Diagnostic performance improved in both sexes with no significant differences between the sexes (AUC: 0.93 vs 0.90, P = .43). There were no differences in the discrimination of FFRCT after application of the clinical use rule when stratified by age ≥ 65 or <65 years (AUC: 0.95 vs 0.90, P = .10).

Conclusions

The diagnostic accuracy and discriminatory power of FFRCT improve significantly after the application of a clinical use rule which includes all clinically relevant vessels >2 mm in diameter. FFRCT has similar diagnostic accuracy and discriminatory power for ischemia detection in men and women irrespective of age using a cut point of 65 years.

Objectives

There is conflicting evidence about the comparative diagnostic accuracy of the Agatston score versus computed tomography angiography (CTA) in patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD).

Purpose

To determine whether CTA is superior to the Agatston score in the diagnosis of CAD.

Methods

In total 2452 patients with stable chest pain and a clinical indication for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) for suspected CAD were included by the Collaborative Meta-analysis of Cardiac CT (COME-CCT) Consortium. An Agatston score of > 400 was considered positive, and obstructive CAD defined as at least 50% coronary diameter stenosis on ICA was used as the reference standard.

Results

Obstructive CAD was diagnosed in 44.9% of patients (1100/2452). The median Agatston score was 74. Diagnostic accuracy of CTA for the detection of obstructive CAD (81.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.5 to 84.1%) was significantly higher than that of the Agatston score (68.8%, 95% CI: 64.2 to 73.1%, p < 0.001). Among patients with an Agatston score of zero, 17% (101/600) had obstructive CAD. Diagnostic accuracy of CTA was not significantly different in patients with low to intermediate (1 to < 100, 100-400) versus moderate to high Agatston scores (401-1000, > 1000).

Conclusions

Results in our international cohort show CTA to have significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than the Agatston score in patients with stable chest pain, suspected CAD, and a clinical indication for ICA. Diagnostic performance of CTA is not affected by a higher Agatston score while an Agatston score of zero does not reliably exclude obstructive CAD.

Key points

• CTA showed significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (81.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.5 to 84.1%) for diagnosis of coronary artery disease when compared to the Agatston score (68.8%, 95% CI: 64.2 to 73.1%, p < 0.001). • Diagnostic performance of CTA was not affected by increased amount of calcium and was not significantly different in patients with low to intermediate (1 to <100, 100-400) versus moderate to high Agatston scores (401-1000, > 1000). • Seventeen percent of patients with an Agatston score of zero showed obstructive coronary artery disease by invasive angiography showing absence of coronary artery calcium cannot reliably exclude coronary artery disease.

We aimed to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac diagnostic testing and practice and to assess its impact in different regions in Europe. The online survey organised by the International Atomic Energy Agency Division of Human Health collected information on changes in cardiac imaging procedural volumes between March 2019 and March/April 2020. Data were collected from 909 centres in 108 countries. Centres in Northern and Southern Europe were more likely to cancel all outpatient activities compared with Western and Eastern Europe. There was a greater reduction in total procedure volumes in Europe compared with the rest of the world in March 2020 (45% vs 41%, p=0.003), with a more marked reduction in Southern Europe (58%), but by April 2020 this was similar in Europe and the rest of the world (69% vs 63%, p=0.261). Regional variations were apparent between imaging modalities, but the largest reductions were in Southern Europe for nearly all modalities. In March 2020, location in Southern Europe was the only independent predictor of the reduction in procedure volume. However, in April 2020, lower gross domestic product and higher COVID-19 deaths were the only independent predictors. The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on care of patients with cardiac disease, with substantial regional variations in Europe. This has potential long-term implications for patients and plans are required to enable the diagnosis of non-COVID-19 conditions during the ongoing pandemic.

Abstract Background Coronary computed tomography angiography has become the foremost noninvasive imaging modality of the coronary arteries and is used as an alternative to the reference standard, conventional coronary angiography, for direct visualization and detection of coronary artery stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Nevertheless, there is considerable debate regarding the optimal target population to maximize clinical performance and patient benefit. The most obvious indication for noninvasive coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease would be to reliably exclude significant stenosis and, thus, avoid unnecessary invasive conventional coronary angiography. To do this, a test should have, at clinically appropriate pretest likelihoods, minimal false-negative outcomes resulting in a high negative predictive value. However, little is known about the influence of patient characteristics on the clinical predictive values of coronary computed tomography angiography. Previous regular systematic reviews and meta-analyses had to rely on limited summary patient cohort data offered by primary studies. Performing an individual patient data meta-analysis will enable a much more detailed and powerful analysis and thus increase representativeness and generalizability of the results. The individual patient data meta-analysis is registered with the PROSPERO database (CoMe-CCT, CRD42012002780). Methods/Design The analysis will include individual patient data from published and unpublished prospective diagnostic accuracy studies comparing coronary computed tomography angiography with conventional coronary angiography. These studies will be identified performing a systematic search in several electronic databases. Corresponding authors will be contacted and asked to provide obligatory and additional data. Risk factors, previous test results and symptoms of individual patients will be used to estimate the pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease. A bivariate random-effects model will be used to calculate pooled mean negative and positive predictive values as well as sensitivity and specificity. The primary outcome of interest will be positive and negative predictive values of coronary computed tomography angiography for the presence of coronary artery disease as a function of pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease, analyzed by meta-regression. As a secondary endpoint, factors that may influence the diagnostic performance and clinical value of computed tomography, such as heart rate and body mass index of patients, number of detector rows, and administration of beta blockade and nitroglycerin, will be investigated by integrating them as further covariates into the bivariate random-effects model. Discussion This collaborative individual patient data meta-analysis should provide answers to the pivotal question of which patients benefit most from noninvasive coronary computed tomography angiography and thus help to adequately select the right patients for this test.