Background: Few data exist on long-term outcome in patients undergoing combined coronary CT angiography (CTA) and myocardial CT perfusion imaging (CTP) as well as invasive coronary angiography (ICA... Show moreBackground: Few data exist on long-term outcome in patients undergoing combined coronary CT angiography (CTA) and myocardial CT perfusion imaging (CTP) as well as invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and single photon emission tomography (SPECT). Methods: At 16 centers, 381 patients were followed for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) for the CORE320 study. All patients underwent coronary CTA, CTP, and SPECT before ICA within 60 days. Prognostic performance according binary results (normal/abnormal) was assessed by 5-year major cardiovascular events (MACE) free survival and area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC). Results: Follow up beyond 2-years was available in 323 patients. MACE-free survival rate was greater among patients with normal combined CTA-CTP findings compared to ICA-SPECT: 85 vs. 80% (95% confidence interval [CI] for difference 0.1, 11.3) though event-free survival time was similar (4.54 vs. 4.37 years, 95% CI for dif-ference:-0.03, 0.36). Abnormal results by combined CTA-CTP was associated with 3.83 years event-free survival vs. 3.66 years after abnormal combined ICA-SPECT (95% CI for difference:-0.05, 0.39). Predicting MACE by AUC also was similar: 65 vs. 65 (difference 0.1; 95% CI-4.6, 4.9). When MACE was restricted to cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, AUC for CTA-CTP was 71 vs. 60 by ICA-SPECT (difference 11.2; 95% CI-1.0, 19.7). Conclusions: Combined CTA-CTP evaluation yields at least equal 5-year prognostic information as combined ICA-SPECT assessment in patients presenting with suspected coronary artery disease. Noninvasive cardiac CT assessment may eliminate the need for diagnostic cardiac catheterization in many patients. Clinical trial registration:NCT00934037. Show less
Kishi, S.; Magalhaes, T.A.; Cerci, R.J.; Zimmermann, E.; Matheson, M.B.; Vavere, A.; ... ; Arbab-Zadeh, A. 2020
Purpose To provide comparative prognostic information of coronary atherosclerotic plaque volume and stenosis assessment in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods We followed... Show morePurpose To provide comparative prognostic information of coronary atherosclerotic plaque volume and stenosis assessment in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods We followed 372 patients with suspected or known CAD enrolled in the CORE320 study for 2 years after baseline 320-detector row cardiac CT scanning and invasive quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). CT images were analyzed for coronary calcium scanning (CACS), semi-automatically derived total percent atheroma volume (PAV), segment stenosis score (SSS), in addition to traditional stenosis assessment (>= 50%) by CT and QCA for (1) 30-day revascularization and (2) major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to compare accuracy of risk prediction. Results Sixty percent of patients had obstructive CAD by QCA with 23% undergoing 30-day revascularization and 9% experiencing MACE at 2 years. Most late events (20/32) were revascularization procedures. Prediction of 30-day revascularization was modest (AUC range 0.67-0.78) but improved after excluding patients with known CAD (AUC range 0.73-0.86, p < 0.05 for all). Similarly, prediction of MACE improved after excluding patients with known CAD (AUC range 0.58-0.73 vs. 0.63-0.77). CT metrics of atherosclerosis burden performed overall similarly but stenosis assessment was superior for predicting 30-day revascularization. Conclusions Angiographic and coronary atherosclerotic plaque metrics perform only modestly well for predicting 30-day revascularization and 2-year MACE in high risk patients but improve after excluding patients with known CAD. Atherosclerotic plaque metrics did not yield incremental value over stenosis assessment for predicting events that predominantly consisted of revascularization procedures. Show less
Background: CT allows evaluation of atherosclerosis, coronary stenosis, and myocardial ischemia. Data on the characterization of ischemia and no obstructive stenosis (INOCA) at CT remain limited... Show moreBackground: CT allows evaluation of atherosclerosis, coronary stenosis, and myocardial ischemia. Data on the characterization of ischemia and no obstructive stenosis (INOCA) at CT remain limited.Purpose: This was an observational study to describe the prevalence of INOCA defined at coronary CT angiography with CT perfusion imaging and associated clinical and atherosclerotic characteristics. The analysis was also performed for the combination of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and SPECT as a secondary aim.Materials and Methods: The prospective CORE320 study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00934037) enrolled participants between November 2009 and July 2011 who were symptomatic and referred for clinically indicated ICA. Participants underwent CT angiography, rest-adenosinestress CT perfusion, and rest-stress SPECT prior to ICA. For this ancillary study, the following three phenotypes were considered, using either CT angiography/CT perfusion or ICA/SPECT data: (a) participants with obstructive (>= 50%) stenosis, (b) participants with no obstructive stenosis but ischemia (ie, INOCA) on the basis of abnormal perfusion imaging results, and (c) participants with no obstructive stenosis and normal perfusion imaging results. Clinical characteristics and CT angiography athero-scleroticplaque measures were compared by using the Pearson chi(2) or Wilcoxon rank-sum test.Results: A total of 381 participants (mean age, 62 years [interquartile range, 56-68 years]; 129 [34%] women) were evaluated. A total of 31 (27%) of 115 participants without obstructive (>= 50%) stenosis at CT angiography had abnormal CT perfusion findings. The corresponding value for ICA/SPECT was 45 (30%) of 151. The prevalence of INOCA was 31 (8%) of 381 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5%, 11%) with CT angiography/CT perfusion and 45 (12%) of 381 (95% CI: 9%, 15%) with ICA/SPECT. Participants with CT-defined INOCA had greater total atheroma volume (118 vs 60 mm(3), P =.008), more positive remodeling (13% vs 1%, P =.006), and greater low-attenuation atheroma volume (20 vs 10 mm(3), P =.007) than participants with no obstructive stenosis and no ischemia. Comparisons for ICA/SPECT showed similar trends.Conclusion: In CORE320, ischemia and no obstructivestenosis (INOCA) prevalence was 8% and 12% at CT angiography/CT perfusion and invasive coronary angiography/SPECT, respectively. Participants with INOCA had greater atherosclerotic burden and more adverse plaque features at CT compared with those with no obstructive stenosis and no ischemia. (C) RSNA, 2019 Show less
