Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 3/2010

Open Access 01-06-2010 | Original Article

Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography for the detection of in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis

Authors: Nazario Carrabba, MD, Joanne D. Schuijf, PhD, Fleur R. de Graaf, MD, Guido Parodi, MD, Erica Maffei, MD, Renato Valenti, MD, Alessandro Palumbo, MD, Annick C. Weustink, MD, Nico R. Mollet, MD, PhD, Gabriele Accetta, PhD, Filippo Cademartiri, MD, PhD, David Antoniucci, MD, Jeroen J. Bax, MD, PhD

Published in: Journal of Nuclear Cardiology | Issue 3/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

We sought to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multi-detector row computed tomography (MDCT) compared with invasive coronary angiography for in-stent restenosis (ISR) detection.

Methods

MEDLINE, Cochrane library, and BioMed Central database searches were performed until April 2009 for original articles. Inclusion criteria were (1) 64-MDCT was used as a diagnostic test for ISR, with >50% diameter stenosis selected as the cut-off criterion for significant ISR, using invasive coronary angiography and quantitative coronary angiography as the standard of reference; (2) absolute numbers of true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative results could be derived. Standard meta-analytic methods were applied.

Results

Nine studies with a total of 598 patients with 978 stents included were considered eligible. On average, 9% of stents were unassessable (range 0-42%). Accuracy tests with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing 64-MDCT vs invasive coronary angiography showed that pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (random effect model) values were: 86% (95% CI 80-91%), 93% (95% CI 91-95%), 12.32 (95% CI 7.26-20.92), 0.18 (95% CI 0.12-0.28) for binary ISR detection. The symmetric area under the curve value was 0.94, indicating good agreement between 64-MDCT and invasive coronary angiography.

Conclusions

64-MDCT has a good diagnostic accuracy for ISR detection with a particularly high negative predictive value. However, still a relatively large proportion of stents remains uninterpretable. Accordingly, only in selected patients, 64-MDCT may serve as a potential alternative noninvasive method to rule out ISR.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1994;331:496-501.CrossRefPubMed Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1994;331:496-501.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Med 1994;331:489-95.CrossRefPubMed Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Med 1994;331:489-95.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004;350:221-31.CrossRefPubMed Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004;350:221-31.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1773-80.CrossRefPubMed Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1773-80.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Zellweger MJ, Weinbacher M, Zutter AW, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with silent versus symptomatic ischemia six months after percutaneous coronary intervention and stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:33-40.CrossRefPubMed Zellweger MJ, Weinbacher M, Zutter AW, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with silent versus symptomatic ischemia six months after percutaneous coronary intervention and stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:33-40.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, et al. Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2002;106:2051-4.CrossRefPubMed Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, et al. Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2002;106:2051-4.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, et al. Feasibility of assessment of coronary stent patency using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2004;94:427-30.CrossRefPubMed Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, et al. Feasibility of assessment of coronary stent patency using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2004;94:427-30.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Whiting P, Harbord R, Kleijnen J. No role for quality scores in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005;5:19.CrossRefPubMed Whiting P, Harbord R, Kleijnen J. No role for quality scores in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005;5:19.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Deeks JJ. Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. BMJ 2001;323:157-62.CrossRefPubMed Deeks JJ. Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. BMJ 2001;323:157-62.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Deville WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, et al. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: Didactic guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol 2002;2:9.CrossRefPubMed Deville WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, et al. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: Didactic guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol 2002;2:9.CrossRefPubMed
11.
12.
go back to reference Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: Data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 1993;12:1293-316.PubMed Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: Data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 1993;12:1293-316.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Harbord RM, Deeks JJ, Egger M, et al. A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Biostatistics 2007;8:239-51.CrossRefPubMed Harbord RM, Deeks JJ, Egger M, et al. A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Biostatistics 2007;8:239-51.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Pugliese F, Weustink AC, van Mieghem C, et al. Dual source coronary computed tomography angiography for detecting in-stent restenosis. Heart 2008;94:848-54.CrossRefPubMed Pugliese F, Weustink AC, van Mieghem C, et al. Dual source coronary computed tomography angiography for detecting in-stent restenosis. Heart 2008;94:848-54.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Rist C, von Ziegler F, Nikolaou K, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent patency and restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography. Acad Radiol 2006;13:1465-73.CrossRefPubMed Rist C, von Ziegler F, Nikolaou K, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent patency and restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography. Acad Radiol 2006;13:1465-73.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Gaspar T, Halon DA, Lewis BS, et al. Diagnosis of coronary in-stent restenosis with multidetector row spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1573-9.CrossRefPubMed Gaspar T, Halon DA, Lewis BS, et al. Diagnosis of coronary in-stent restenosis with multidetector row spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1573-9.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference van Mieghem CA, Cademartiri F, Mollet NR, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography for the evaluation of stent patency after left main coronary artery stenting: A comparison with conventional coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 2006;114:645-53.CrossRefPubMed van Mieghem CA, Cademartiri F, Mollet NR, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography for the evaluation of stent patency after left main coronary artery stenting: A comparison with conventional coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 2006;114:645-53.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Cademartiri F, Schuijf JD, Pugliese F, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multislice computed tomography coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2204-10.CrossRefPubMed Cademartiri F, Schuijf JD, Pugliese F, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multislice computed tomography coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2204-10.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Carrabba N, Bamoshmoosh M, Carusi LM, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography for detecting drug eluting in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 2007;100:1754-8.CrossRefPubMed Carrabba N, Bamoshmoosh M, Carusi LM, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography for detecting drug eluting in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 2007;100:1754-8.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Ehara M, Kawai M, Surmely JF, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary in-stent restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography: Comparison with invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:951-9.CrossRefPubMed Ehara M, Kawai M, Surmely JF, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary in-stent restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography: Comparison with invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:951-9.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Manghat N, Van Lingen R, Hewson P, et al. Usefulness of 64-detector row computed tomography for evaluation of intracoronary stents in symptomatic patients with suspected in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 2008;101:1567-73.CrossRefPubMed Manghat N, Van Lingen R, Hewson P, et al. Usefulness of 64-detector row computed tomography for evaluation of intracoronary stents in symptomatic patients with suspected in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 2008;101:1567-73.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Oncel D, Oncel G, Karaca M. Coronary stent patency and in-stent restenosis: Determination with 64-section multidetector CT coronary angiography—initial experience. Radiology 2007;242:403-9.CrossRefPubMed Oncel D, Oncel G, Karaca M. Coronary stent patency and in-stent restenosis: Determination with 64-section multidetector CT coronary angiography—initial experience. Radiology 2007;242:403-9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Rixe J, Achenbach S, Ropers D, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent restenosis by 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography. Eur Heart J 2006;27:2567-72.CrossRefPubMed Rixe J, Achenbach S, Ropers D, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent restenosis by 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography. Eur Heart J 2006;27:2567-72.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Hamon M, Champ-Rigot L, Morello R, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of in-stent coronary restenosis detection with multislice spiral computed tomography: A meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2008;18:217-25.CrossRefPubMed Hamon M, Champ-Rigot L, Morello R, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of in-stent coronary restenosis detection with multislice spiral computed tomography: A meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2008;18:217-25.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Mahnken AH, Muhlenbruch G, Seyfarth T, et al. 64-slice computed tomography assessment of coronary artery stents: A phantom study. Acta Radiol 2006;47:36-42.CrossRefPubMed Mahnken AH, Muhlenbruch G, Seyfarth T, et al. 64-slice computed tomography assessment of coronary artery stents: A phantom study. Acta Radiol 2006;47:36-42.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Sun Z, Almutairi AM. Diagnostic accuracy of 64 multislice CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2010;73:266-73.CrossRefPubMed Sun Z, Almutairi AM. Diagnostic accuracy of 64 multislice CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2010;73:266-73.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Mahnken AH, Buecker A, Wildberger JE, et al. Coronary artery stents in multislice computed tomography: In vitro artifact evaluation. Invest Radiol 2004;39:27-33.CrossRefPubMed Mahnken AH, Buecker A, Wildberger JE, et al. Coronary artery stents in multislice computed tomography: In vitro artifact evaluation. Invest Radiol 2004;39:27-33.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Nieman K, Rensing BJ, van Geuns RJ, et al. Non-invasive coronary angiography with multislice spiral computed tomography: Impact of heart rate. Heart 2002;88:470-4.CrossRefPubMed Nieman K, Rensing BJ, van Geuns RJ, et al. Non-invasive coronary angiography with multislice spiral computed tomography: Impact of heart rate. Heart 2002;88:470-4.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: Impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 2006;113:1305-10.CrossRefPubMed Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: Impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 2006;113:1305-10.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Stolzmann P, Leschka S, Scheffel H, et al. Dual-source CT in step-and-shoot mode: Noninvasive coronary angiography with low radiation dose. Radiology 2008;249:71-80.CrossRefPubMed Stolzmann P, Leschka S, Scheffel H, et al. Dual-source CT in step-and-shoot mode: Noninvasive coronary angiography with low radiation dose. Radiology 2008;249:71-80.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Mahnken AH, Seyfarth T, Flohr T, et al. Flat-panel detector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stents: Phantom study in comparison with 16-slice spiral computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2005;40:8-13.PubMed Mahnken AH, Seyfarth T, Flohr T, et al. Flat-panel detector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stents: Phantom study in comparison with 16-slice spiral computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2005;40:8-13.PubMed
32.
go back to reference Min JK, Swaminathan RV, Vass M, et al. High-definition multidetector computed tomography for evaluation of coronary artery stents: Comparison to standard-definition 64-detector row computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009;3:246-51.CrossRefPubMed Min JK, Swaminathan RV, Vass M, et al. High-definition multidetector computed tomography for evaluation of coronary artery stents: Comparison to standard-definition 64-detector row computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009;3:246-51.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference de Graaf FR, Schuijf JD, van Velzen JE et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of 320-Row Multidetector Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography to Non-Invasively Assess In-Stent Restenosis. Invest Radiol 2010, in press. de Graaf FR, Schuijf JD, van Velzen JE et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of 320-Row Multidetector Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography to Non-Invasively Assess In-Stent Restenosis. Invest Radiol 2010, in press.
Metadata
Title
Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography for the detection of in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis
Authors
Nazario Carrabba, MD
Joanne D. Schuijf, PhD
Fleur R. de Graaf, MD
Guido Parodi, MD
Erica Maffei, MD
Renato Valenti, MD
Alessandro Palumbo, MD
Annick C. Weustink, MD
Nico R. Mollet, MD, PhD
Gabriele Accetta, PhD
Filippo Cademartiri, MD, PhD
David Antoniucci, MD
Jeroen J. Bax, MD, PhD
Publication date
01-06-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology / Issue 3/2010
Print ISSN: 1071-3581
Electronic ISSN: 1532-6551
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-010-9218-2

Other articles of this Issue 3/2010

Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 3/2010 Go to the issue

Letter to the Editor

Letter to the Editor

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR CARDIOLOGY NEWS UPDATE

Radiation Reduction: How Low Can YOU go?