Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 7/2007

01-07-2007 | Cardiac

Multislice computed tomography: angiographic emulation versus standard assessment for detection of coronary stenoses

Authors: Dirk Schnapauff, Hans-Peter Dübel, Jürgen Scholze, Gert Baumann, Bernd Hamm, Marc Dewey

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 7/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

The present study investigated angiographic emulation of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) (catheter-like visualization) as an alternative approach of analyzing and visualizing findings in comparison with standard assessment. Thirty patients (120 coronary arteries) were randomly selected from 90 prospectively investigated patients with suspected coronary artery disease who underwent MSCT (16-slice scanner, 0.5 mm collimation, 400 ms rotation time) prior to conventional coronary angiography for comparison of both approaches. Sensitivity and specificity of angiographic emulation [81% (26/32) and 93% (82/88)] were not significantly different from those of standard assessment [88% (28/32) and 99% (87/88)], while the per-case analysis time was significantly shorter for angiographic emulation than for standard assessment (3.4 ± 1.5 vs 7.0 ± 2.5 min, P < 0.001). Both interventional and referring cardiologists preferred angiographic emulation over standard curved multiplanar reformations of MSCT coronary angiography for illustration, mainly because of improved overall lucidity and depiction of sidebranches (P < 0.001). In conclusion, angiographic emulation of MSCT reduces analysis time, yields a diagnostic accuracy comparable to that of standard assessment, and is preferred by cardiologists for visualization of results.
Literature
1.
Dewey M, Borges AC, Kivelitz D et al (2004) Coronary artery disease: new insights and their implications for radiology. Eur Radiol 14:1048–1054PubMedCrossRef
2.
Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PM, de Feyter PJ (2002) Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 106:2051–2054PubMedCrossRef
3.
Ropers D, Baum U, Pohle K et al (2003) Detection of coronary artery stenoses with thin-slice multi-detector row spiral computed tomography and multiplanar reconstruction. Circulation 107:664–666PubMedCrossRef
4.
Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Nieman K et al (2004) Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol 43:2265–2270PubMedCrossRef
5.
Dewey M, Laule M, Krug L et al (2004) Multisegment and halfscan reconstruction of 16-slice computed tomography for detection of coronary artery stenoses. Invest Radiol 39:223–229PubMedCrossRef
6.
Dewey M, Teige F, Schnapauff D et al (2006) Noninvasive detection of coronary artery stenoses with multislice computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Intern Med 145:407–415PubMed
7.
Cademartiri F, Mollet N, Lemos PA et al (2004) Standard versus user-interactive assessment of significant coronary stenoses with multislice computed tomography coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol 94:1590–1593PubMedCrossRef
8.
Dewey M, Schnapauff D, Laule M et al (2004) Multislice CT coronary angiography: evaluation of an automatic vessel detection tool. Fortschr Röntgenstr 478–483
9.
Blobel J, Baartman H, Rogalla P, Mews J, Lembcke A (2003) Räumliche und zeitliche Auflösung für die Herzdiagnostik mit 16-Schicht-Computertomographie. Röfo 175:1264–1271PubMed
10.
Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL et al (1975) A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 51:5–40PubMed
11.
Hawass NE (1997) Comparing the sensitivities and specificities of two diagnostic procedures performed on the same group of patients. Br J Radiol 70:360–366PubMed
12.
Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310PubMed
13.
Khan MF, Wesarg S, Gurung J et al (2006) Facilitating coronary artery evaluation in MDCT using a 3D automatic vessel segmentation tool. Eur Radiol 16:1789–1795PubMedCrossRef
14.
Koch K, Oellig F, Oberholzer K et al (2005) Assessment of right ventricular function by 16-detector-row CT: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 15:312–318PubMedCrossRef
15.
Dewey M, Müller M, Teige F, Hamm B (2006) Evaluation of a semiautomatic software tool for left ventricular function analysis with 16-slice computed tomography. Eur Radiol 16:25–31PubMedCrossRef
16.
Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Schmitz BL et al (2005) Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography. JAMA 293:2471–2478PubMedCrossRef
17.
Kefer J, Coche E, Legros G et al (2005) Head-to-head comparison of three-dimensional navigator-gated magnetic resonance imaging and 16-slice computed tomography to detect coronary artery stenosis in patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:92–100PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zorzetto M, Bernardi G, Morocutti G, Fontanelli A (1997) Radiation exposure to patients and operators during diagnostic catheterization and coronary angioplasty. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 40:348–351PubMedCrossRef
19.
Cusma JT, Bell MR, Wondrow MA, Taubel JP, Holmes DR Jr (1999) Real-time measurement of radiation exposure to patients during diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous interventional procedures. J Am Coll Cardiol 33:427–435PubMedCrossRef
20.
Gerber TC, Stratmann BP, Kuzo RS, Kantor B, Morin RL (2005) Effect of acquisition technique on radiation dose and image quality in multidetector row computed tomography coronary angiography with submillimeter collimation. Invest Radiol 40:556–563PubMedCrossRef
21.
Trabold T, Buchgeister M, Kuttner A et al (2003) Estimation of radiation exposure in 16-detector row computed tomography of the heart with retrospective ECG-gating. Röfo 175:1051–1055PubMed
22.
Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A et al (2005) Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 26:1482–1487PubMedCrossRef
23.
Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F et al (2005) Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:147–154PubMedCrossRef
24.
Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Runza G et al (2006) Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Radiol 16:575–582PubMedCrossRef
25.
Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, Goldstein JA (2005) Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:552–557PubMedCrossRef
26.
Ropers D, Rixe J, Anders K et al (2006) Usefulness of multidetector row spiral computed tomography with 64- × 0.6-mm collimation and 330-ms rotation for the noninvasive detection of significant coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol 97:343–348PubMedCrossRef
27.
Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA et al (2005) High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 112:2318–2323PubMedCrossRef
28.
Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, Wintersperger BJ et al (2006) Dual-source CT cardiac imaging: initial experience. Eur Radiol 16:1409–1415PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Multislice computed tomography: angiographic emulation versus standard assessment for detection of coronary stenoses
Authors
Dirk Schnapauff
Hans-Peter Dübel
Jürgen Scholze
Gert Baumann
Bernd Hamm
Marc Dewey
Publication date
01-07-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 7/2007
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0540-7

Other articles of this Issue 7/2007

European Radiology 7/2007 Go to the issue

News of the ESR

Recognition awards at ECR 2007

Musculoskeletal

MRI and US of gluteal tendinopathy in greater trochanteric pain syndrome

Musculoskeletal

Hip pain in adults: MR imaging appearance of common causes

Musculoskeletal

Cartilage lesions of the glenohumeral joint: diagnostic effectiveness of multidetector spiral CT arthrography and comparison with arthroscopy

Interpretation Corner

An unusual cause for bronchial obstruction (2007: 7a)

Neuro

Proton MR spectroscopy of the brain at 3 T: an update