A review of adherence to the guidelines for coronary CT angiography quantitative stenosis grading thresholds in published research

References

• Lloyd-Jones D, Adams RJ, Brown TM, et al. American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Executive summary: heart disease and stroke statistics – 2010 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2010;121:948–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalra DK, Heo R, Valenti V, Nakazato R, Min JK. Role of computed tomography for diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2014;34:1144–54.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008;359:2324–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendel RC. Is computed tomography coronary angiography the most accurate and effective noninvasive imaging tool to evaluate patients with acute chest pain in the emergency department? CT coronary angiography is the most accurate and effective noninvasive imaging tool for evaluating patients presenting with chest pain to the emergency department: antagonist viewpoint. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2:264–75.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Litt HI, Gatsonis C, Snyder B, et al. CT angiography for safe discharge of patients with possible acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1393–403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffmann U, Truong QA, Schoenfeld DA, et al. Coronary CT angiography versus standard evaluation in acute chest pain. N Engl J Med 2012;367:299–308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:W65–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tamarappoo BK, Gutstein A, Cheng VY, et al. Assessment of the relationship between stenosis severity and distribution of coronary artery stenoses on multislice computed tomographic angiography and myocardial ischemia detected by single photon emission computed tomography. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17:791–802.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• de Azevedo CF, Hadlich MS, Bezerra SG, et al. Prognostic value of CT angiography in patients with inconclusive functional stress tests. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:740–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Dunning A, Lin FY, et al. Age- and sex-related differences in all-cause mortality risk based on coronary computed tomography angiography findings results from the International Multicenter CONFIRM (Coronary CT Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: an International Multicenter Registry) of 23,854 patients without known coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:849–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng VY, Berman DS, Rozanski A, et al. Performance of the traditional age, sex, and angina typicality-based approach for estimating pretest probability of angiographically significant coronary artery disease in patients undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography: results from the multinational coronary CT angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: an international multicenter registry (CONFIRM). Circulation 2011;124:2423–32; 1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villines TC, Hulten EA, Shaw LJ, et al. Prevalence and severity of coronary artery disease and adverse events among symptomatic patients with coronary artery calcification scores of zero undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography: results from the CONFIRM (Coronary CT Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: an International Multicenter) registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:2533–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow BJ, Wells GA, Chen L, et al. Prognostic value of 64-slice cardiac computed tomography severity of coronary artery disease, coronary atherosclerosis, and left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:1017–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iwasaki K, Matsumoto T, Aono H, Furukawa H, Samukawa M. Relationship between epicardial fat measured by 64-multidetector computed tomography and coronary artery disease. Clin Cardiol 2011;34:166–71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iwasaki K, Matsumoto T. Myocardial perfusion defect in patients with coronary artery disease demonstrated by 64-multidetector computed tomography at rest. Clin Cardiol 2011;34:454–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee BC, Lee WJ, Hsu HC, Chien KL, Shih TT, Chen MF. Using clinical cardiovascular risk scores to predict coronary artery plaque severity and stenosis detected by CT coronary angiography in asymptomatic Chinese subjects. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;27:669–78.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shmilovich H, Cheng VY, Rajani R, et al. Relation of diagonal ear lobe crease to the presence, extent, and severity of coronary artery disease determined by coronary computed tomography angiography. Am J Cardiol 2012;109:1283–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gottlieb I, Miller JM, Arbab-Zadeh A, et al. The absence of coronary calcification does not exclude obstructive coronary artery disease or the need for revascularization in patients referred for conventional coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:627–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blankstein R, Ahmed W, Bamberg F, et al. Comparison of exercise treadmill testing with cardiac computed tomography angiography among patients presenting to the emergency room with chest pain: the Rule Out Myocardial Infarction Using Computer-Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT) study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5:233–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chiou KR, Peng NJ, Hsiao SH, et al. CT of coronary heart disease: Part 2, Dual-phase MDCT evaluates late symptom recurrence in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients after revascularization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198:548–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kerl JM, Schoepf UJ, Zwerner PL, et al. Accuracy of coronary artery stenosis detection with CT versus conventional coronary angiography compared with composite findings from both tests as an enhanced reference standard. Eur Radiol 2011;21:1895–903.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bauer RW, Thilo C, Chiaramida SA, Vogl TJ, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. Noncalcified atherosclerotic plaque burden at coronary CT angiography: a better predictor of ischemia at stress myocardial perfusion imaging than calcium score and stenosis severity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:410–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen CK, Kuo YS, Liu CA, et al. Frequency and risk factors associated with atherosclerotic plaques in patients with a zero coronary artery calcium score. J Chin Med Assoc 2012;75:10–15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rocha-Filho JA, Blankstein R, Shturman LD, et al. Incremental value of adenosine-induced stress myocardial perfusion imaging with dual-source CT at cardiac CT angiography. Radiology 2010;254:410–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow BJ, Abraham A, Wells GA, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and impact of computed tomographic coronary angiography on utilization of invasive coronary angiography. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2:16–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoo DH, Chun EJ, Choi SI, et al. Significance of noncalcified coronary plaque in asymptomatic subjects with low coronary artery calcium score: assessment with coronary computed tomography angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;27:27–35.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lim S, Shin H, Lee Y, et al. Effect of metabolic syndrome on coronary artery stenosis and plaque characteristics as assessed with 64-detector row cardiac CT. Radiology 2011;261:437–45.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Feuchtner GM, Cury RC, Jodocy D, et al. Differences in coronary plaque composition by noninvasive computed tomography angiography in individuals with and without obstructive coronary artery disease. Atherosclerosis 2011;215:90–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chang AM, Le J, Matsuura AC, Litt HI, Hollander JE. Does coronary artery calcium scoring add to the predictive value of coronary computed tomography angiography for adverse cardiovascular events in low-risk chest pain patients? Acad Emerg Med 2011;18:1065–71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nieman K, Galema T, Weustink A, et al. Computed tomography versus exercise electrocardiography in patients with stable chest complaints: real-world experiences from a fast-track chest pain clinic. Heart 2009;95:1669–75.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Xie F, Qian Q, Chen Z, Ma G, Feng Y. Chitinase 3-like 1 gene-329G/A polymorphism, plasma concentration and risk of coronary heart disease in a Chinese population. Gene 2012;499:135–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vavere AL, Arbab-Zadeh A, Rochitte CE, et al. Coronary artery stenoses: accuracy of 64-detector row CT angiography in segments with mild, moderate, or severe calcification – a subanalysis of the CORE-64 trial. Radiology 2011;261:100–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlett CL, Banerji D, Siegel E, et al. Prognostic value of CT angiography for major adverse cardiac events in patients with acute chest pain from the emergency department: 2-year outcomes of the ROMICAT trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:481–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijs MF, Meijboom WB, Prokop M, et al. Is there a role for CT coronary angiography in patients with symptomatic angina? Effect of coronary calcium score on identification of stenosis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;25:847–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chong FY, Soon K, Brown F, Bell K, Lim YL. Negative coronary CT angiography for chest pain assessment predicts low event rate in 5 years. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2012;56:55–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Min JK, Leipsic J, Pencina MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. JAMA 2012;308:1237–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon YE, Chang HJ, Cho I, et al. Incidence of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis in patients with suspected embolic stroke using cardiac computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;27:1035–44.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ahmadi N, Nabavi V, Nuguri V, et al. Low fingertip temperature rebound measured by digital thermal monitoring strongly correlates with the presence and extent of coronary artery disease diagnosed by 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;25:725–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madaj P, Gopal A, Hamirani Y, Zeb I, Elamir S, Budoff M. The degree of stenosis on cardiac catheterization compared to calcified coronary segments on multi-detector row cardiac computed tomography MDCT. Acad Radiol 2010;17:1001–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Adraktas D, Brasic N, Furtado AD, et al. Carotid atherosclerosis does not predict coronary, vertebral, or aortic atherosclerosis in patients with acute stroke symptoms. Stroke 2010;41:1604–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Park MJ, Jung JI, Choi YS, et al. Coronary CT angiography in patients with high calcium score: evaluation of plaque characteristics and diagnostic accuracy. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;27:43–51.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koo BK, Erglis A, Doh JH, et al. Diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1989–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Husmann L, Gaemperli O, Valenta I, et al. Impact of vessel attenuation on quantitative coronary angiography with 64-slice CT. Br J Radiol 2009;82:649–53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boogers MJ, Schuijf JD, Kitslaar PH, et al. Automated quantification of stenosis severity on 64-slice CT: a comparison with quantitative coronary angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;3:699–709.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhao X, Zhao Q, Chu B, et al. Prevalence of compositional features in subclinical carotid atherosclerosis determined by high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging in chinese patients with coronary artery disease. Stroke 2010;41:1157–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li Y, Zhang J, Lu Z, Pan J. Discrepant findings of computed tomography quantification of minimal lumen area of coronary artery stenosis: correlation with intravascular ultrasound. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:3270–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nakazato R, Dey D, Cheng VY, et al. Epicardial fat volume and concurrent presence of both myocardial ischemia and obstructive coronary artery disease. Atherosclerosis 2012;221:422–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rispler S, Aronson D, Abadi S, et al. Integrated SPECT/CT for assessment of haemodynamically significant coronary artery lesions in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38:1917–25.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ko SM, Choi JW, Song MG, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging using adenosine-induced stress dual-energy computed tomography of the heart: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and conventional coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 2011;21:26–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang X, Gai LY, Li P, Chen YD, Li T, Yang L. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source CT angiography and coronary risk stratification. Vasc Health Risk Manag 2010;6:935–41.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• La Grutta L, Runza G, Lo Re G, et al. Prevalence of myocardial bridging and correlation with coronary atherosclerosis studied with 64-slice CT coronary angiography. Radiol Med 2009;114:1024–36.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Achenbach S, Goroll T, Seltmann M, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses by low-dose, prospectively ECG-triggered, high-pitch spiral coronary CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:328–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liga R, Marini C, Coceani M, et al. Structural abnormalities of the coronary arterial wall–in addition to luminal narrowing – affect myocardial blood flow reserve. J Nucl Med 2011;52:1704–12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stolzmann P, Phan C, Desbiolles L, et al. The heart of patients with aortic aneurysms: evidence from cardiac computed tomography. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2009;9:769–73.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kiriyama T, Toba M, Fukushima Y, et al. Discordance between the morphological and physiological information of 64-slice MSCT coronary angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with intermediate to high probability of coronary artery disease. Circ J 2011;75:1670–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Carrascosa P, Capuñay C, Deviggiano A, et al. Accuracy of low-dose prospectively gated axial coronary CT angiography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis in patients with stable heart rate. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2010;4:197–205.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, et al. Computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging with 320-row detector computed tomography accurately detects myocardial ischemia in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5:333–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinnaiyan KM, Raff GL, Goraya T, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography after stress testing. Results from a multicenter, statewide registry ACIC (Advanced Cardiovascular Imgaing Consortium). J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:688–95.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hachamovitch R, Nutter B, Hlatky MA, et al. Patient management after noninvasive cardiac imaging. Results from SPARC (Study of Myocardial Perfusion and Coronary Anatomy Imaging Roles in Coronary Artery Disease). J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:462–74.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goldstein JA, Chinnaiyan KM, Abidov A, 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;58:1414–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koh H, Tan SY, Hamid N, et al. The absence of severe coronary stenosis (≥70%) on coronary computer tomographic angiography reliably excludes moderate to severe ischemia on myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:E1334–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ebersberger U, Makowski M, Platz U, et al. 3T myocardial perfusion imaging with multitransmit technology compared to coronary angiography and FFR. Circulation 2011;124:A17192.
   Google Scholar
• Alessandri N, Di Matteo A, Rondoni G, et al. Heart imaging: the accuracy of the 64-MSCT in the detection of coronary artery disease. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2009;13:163–71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leipsic J, Koo BK, Erglis A, et al. Diagnostic performance of non-invasive computational fractional flow reserve by coronary computed tomographic angiography for intermediate lesions between 40–69% stenosis: a prospective multicenter study. Thoracic Radiology Society Scientific Sessions; 13–15 March 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Brown C. Validation of Stenosis Assessment by Coronary Artery Computed Tomography Against Invasive Measurements of Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Significant Coronary Artery Stenoses. 2011. Available from http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00817102. Accessed 30 April 2014.
   Google Scholar
• PROspective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE). Available from http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01174550. Accessed 30 April 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Raff GL, Abidov A, Achenbach S, et al. SCCT guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of coronary computed tomographic angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009;3:122–36.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ghoshhajra BB, Lee AM, Ferencik M, et al. Interpreting the interpretations: the use of structured reporting improves referring clinicians’ comprehension of coronary CT angiography reports. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10:432–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Otaki Y, Berman DS, Min JK. Prognostic utility of coronary computed tomographic angiography. Indian Heart J 2013;65:300–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Min JK, Koo BK, Erglis A, et al. Effect of image quality on diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive fractional flow reserve: results from the prospective multicenter international DISCOVER-FLOW study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2012;6:191–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Min JK, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, et al. Rationale and design of the DeFACTO (Determination of Fractional Flow Reserve by Anatomic Computed Tomographic Angiography) study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2011;5:301–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Koo BK, Erglis A, et al. Usefulness of noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms for intermediate stenoses confirmed by quantitative coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol 2012;110:971–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon YE, Choi JH, Kim JH, et al. Noninvasive diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenosis using CT angiography: diagnostic value of transluminal attenuation gradient and fractional flow reserve computed from coronary CT angiography compared to invasively measured fractional flow reserve. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5:1088–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldrovandi A, Cademartiri F, Arduini D, et al. Computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with acute myocardial infarction without significant coronary stenosis. Circulation 2012;126:3000–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voros S, Rinehart S, Qian Z, et al. Coronary atherosclerosis imaging by coronary CT angiography: current status, correlation with intravascular interrogation and meta-analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:537–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med 2010;362:886–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbab-Zadeh A, Hoe J. Quantification of coronary arterial stenoses by multidetector CT angiography in comparison with conventional angiography: methods, caveats, and implications. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4:191–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel MR, Bailey SR, Bonow RO, et al. ACCF/SCAI/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2012 appropriate use criteria for diagnostic catheterization: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:1995–2027.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ota H, Takase K, Rikimaru H, et al. Quantitative vascular measurements in arterial occlusive disease. Radiographics 2005;25:1141–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grunau GL, Min JK, Leipsic J. Modeling of fractional flow reserve based on coronary CT angiography. Curr Cardiol Rep 2013;15:336.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nesto RW, Kowalchuk GJ. The ischemic cascade: temporal sequence of hemodynamic, electrocardiographic and symptomatic expressions of ischemia. Am J Cardiol 1987;59:23C–30C.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahesh M, Cody DD. Physics of cardiac imaging with multiple-row detector CT. Radiographics 2007;27:1495–509.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hacker M, Jakobs T, Matthiesen F, et al. Comparison of spiral multidetector CT angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging in the noninvasive detection of functionally relevant coronary artery lesions: first clinical experiences. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1294–300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim SM, Kim YN, Choe YH. Adenosine-stress dynamic myocardial perfusion imaging using 128-slice dual-source CT: optimization of the CT protocol to reduce the radiation dose. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;29:875–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mark DB, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT 2010 expert consensus document on coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. Circulation 2010;121:2509–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar