Top

Published in:

Open Access 10-03-2022 | Angiography | Cardiac

Computed tomography angiography versus Agatston score for diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with stable chest pain: individual patient data meta-analysis of the international COME-CCT Consortium

Authors: Viktoria Wieske, Mario Walther, Benjamin Dubourg, Hatem Alkadhi, Bjarne L. Nørgaard, Matthijs F. L. Meijs, Axel C. P. Diederichsen, Yung-Liang Wan, Hans Mickley, Konstantin Nikolaou, Abbas A. Shabestari, Bjørn A. Halvorsen, Eugenio Martuscelli, Kai Sun, Bernhard A. Herzog, Roy P. Marcus, Sebastian Leschka, Mario J. Garcia, Kristian A. Ovrehus, Juhani Knuuti, Vladymir Mendoza-Rodriguez, Nuno Bettencourt, Simone Muraglia, Ronny R. Buechel, Philipp A. Kaufmann, Elke Zimmermann, Jean-Claude Tardif, Matthew J. Budoff, Peter Schlattmann, Marc Dewey, on behalf of the COME-CCT Consortium

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 8/2022

Abstract

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.

Available only for authorised users

Arad Y, Goodman KJ, Roth M, Newstein D, Guerci AD (2005) Coronary calcification, coronary disease risk factors, C-reactive protein, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events: the St. Francis Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 46(1):158–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2005.02.088CrossRefPubMed

Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, Zusmer NR, Viamonte M Jr, Detrano R (1990) Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 15(4):827–832CrossRef

Kronmal RA, McClelland RL, Detrano R et al (2007) Risk factors for the progression of coronary artery calcification in asymptomatic subjects: results from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circulation. 115(21):2722–2730. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.674143

Diederichsen AC, Mahabadi AA, Gerke O et al (2015) Increased discordance between HeartScore and coronary artery calcification score after introduction of the new ESC prevention guidelines. Atherosclerosis. 239(1):143–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2015.01.005

Blaha M, Budoff MJ, Shaw LJ et al (2009) Absence of coronary artery calcification and all-cause mortality. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2(6):692–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.03.009

Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A et al (2020) 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 41(3):407–477. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425

Villines TC, Hulten EA, Shaw LJ et al (2011) 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 58(24):2533–2540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.10.851CrossRefPubMed

Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, Rochitte CE et al (2012) Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography coronary angiography according to pre-test probability of coronary artery disease and severity of coronary arterial calcification. The CORE-64 (Coronary Artery Evaluation Using 64-Row Multidetector Computed Tomography Angiography) International Multicenter Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 59(4):379–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.079CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Schuetz GM, Zacharopoulou NM, Schlattmann P, Dewey M (2010) Meta-analysis: noninvasive coronary angiography using computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Intern Med 152(3):167–177. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-152-3-201002020-00008CrossRefPubMed

10.

Haase R, Schlattmann P, Gueret P et al (2019) Diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease using computed tomography angiography in patients with stable chest pain depending on clinical probability and in clinically important subgroups: meta-analysis of individual patient data. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 365:l1945. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1945CrossRef

11.

Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM et al (2010) ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 4(6) 407.e1-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2010.11.001

12.

Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J et al (2012) 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 60(24):e44–e164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.07.013CrossRefPubMed

13.

Schuetz GM, Schlattmann P, Achenbach S et al (2013) Individual patient data meta-analysis for the clinical assessment of coronary computed tomography angiography: protocol of the Collaborative Meta-Analysis of Cardiac CT (CoMe-CCT). Syst Rev 2:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Lau GT, Ridley LJ, Schieb MC et al (2005) Coronary artery stenoses: detection with calcium scoring, CT angiography, and both methods combined. Radiology. 235(2):415–422. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2352031813CrossRefPubMed

15.

Herzog C, Britten M, Balzer JO et al (2004) Multidetector-row cardiac CT: diagnostic value of calcium scoring and CT coronary angiography in patients with symptomatic, but atypical, chest pain. Eur Radiol 14(2):169–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-2197-9CrossRefPubMed

16.

Coughlin SS, Trock B, Criqui MH, Pickle LW, Browner D, Tefft MC (1992) The logistic modeling of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of a diagnostic test. J Clin Epidemiol 45(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(92)90180-uCrossRefPubMed

17.

Simmonds MC, Higgins JP (2016) A general framework for the use of logistic regression models in meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res 25(6):2858–2877. https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280214534409CrossRefPubMed

18.

Leisenring W, Pepe MS, Longton G (1997) A marginal regression modelling framework for evaluating medical diagnostic tests. Stat Med 16(11):1263–1281. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19970615)16:11<1263::aid-sim550>3.0.co;2-mCrossRefPubMed

19.

Leisenring W, Alonzo T, Pepe MS (2000) Comparisons of predictive values of binary medical diagnostic tests for paired designs. Biometrics. 56(2):345–351. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00345.xCrossRefPubMed

20.

Alkadhi H, Scheffel H, Desbiolles L et al (2008) Dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography: influence of obesity, calcium load, and heart rate on diagnostic accuracy. Eur Heart J 29(6):766–776. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehn044CrossRefPubMed

21.

Alkadhi H, Stolzmann P, Desbiolles L et al (2010) Low-dose, 128-slice, dual-source CT coronary angiography: accuracy and radiation dose of the high-pitch and the step-and-shoot mode. Heart 96(12):933–938. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2009.189100CrossRefPubMed

22.

Bettencourt N, Rocha J, Carvalho M et al (2009) Multislice computed tomography in the exclusion of coronary artery disease in patients with presurgical valve disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2(4):306–313. https://doi.org/10.1161/circimaging.108.827717CrossRefPubMed

23.

Bonmassari R, Muraglia S, Centonze M, Coser D, Stoppa G, Disertori M (2006) Noninvasive detection of coronary artery stenosis with 16-slice spiral computed tomography in a population at low to moderate risk for coronary artery disease. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 7(11):817–825. https://doi.org/10.2459/01.jcm.0000250870.55907.75CrossRef

24.

Chen CC, Chen CC, Hsieh IC et al (2011) The effect of calcium score on the diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography. Int J Card Imaging 27(Suppl 1):37–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-011-9955-6CrossRef

25.

Dewey M, Zimmermann E, Deissenrieder F et al (2009) Noninvasive coronary angiography by 320-row computed tomography with lower radiation exposure and maintained diagnostic accuracy: comparison of results with cardiac catheterization in a head-to-head pilot investigation. Circulation. 120(10):867–875. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.109.859280CrossRefPubMed

26.

Diederichsen AC, Petersen H, Jensen LO et al (2009) Diagnostic value of cardiac 64-slice computed tomography: importance of coronary calcium. Scand Cardiovasc J: SCJ 43(5):337–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/14017430902785501CrossRefPubMed

27.

Garcia MJ, Lessick J, Hoffmann MH (2006) Accuracy of 16-row multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis. Jama. 296(4):403–411. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.4.403CrossRefPubMed

28.

Gueret P, Deux JF, Bonello L et al (2013) Diagnostic performance of computed tomography coronary angiography (from the Prospective National Multicenter Multivendor EVASCAN Study). Am J Cardiol 111(4):471–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.10.029CrossRefPubMed

29.

Halvorsen BA, Rodevand O, Hagen G, Herud E, Mielczarek W, Molstad P (2008) Angiography with 64-channel CT upon suspicion of stable coronary disease. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 128(19):2172–2176PubMed

30.

Herzog BA, Wyss CA, Husmann L et al (2009) First head-to-head comparison of effective radiation dose from low-dose 64-slice CT with prospective ECG-triggering versus invasive coronary angiography. Heart 95(20):1656–1661. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2008.162420CrossRefPubMed

31.

Husmann L, Herzog BA, Burger IA et al (2010) Usefulness of additional coronary calcium scoring in low-dose CT coronary angiography with prospective ECG-triggering impact on total effective radiation dose and diagnostic accuracy. Acad Radiol 17(2):201–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2009.09.007CrossRefPubMed

32.

Kajander S, Joutsiniemi E, Saraste M et al (2010) Cardiac positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging accurately detects anatomically and functionally significant coronary artery disease. Circulation. 122(6):603–613. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.109.915009CrossRefPubMed

33.

Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A et al (2005) Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 26(15):1482–1487. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehi261CrossRefPubMed

34.

Leschka S, Scheffel H, Desbiolles L et al (2008) Combining dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography and calcium scoring: added value for the assessment of coronary artery disease. Heart 94(9):1154–1161. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2007.124800CrossRefPubMed

35.

Leschka S, Scheffel H, Husmann L et al (2008) Effect of decrease in heart rate variability on the diagnostic accuracy of 64-MDCT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190(6):1583–1590. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.07.2000CrossRefPubMed

36.

Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D'Eliseo A et al (2004) Accuracy of thin-slice computed tomography in the detection of coronary stenoses. Eur Heart J 25(12):1043–1048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehj.2004.03.024CrossRefPubMed

37.

Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD et al (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 52(25):2135–2144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.08.058CrossRefPubMed

38.

Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, Van Mieghem CA et al (2006) Pre-operative computed tomography coronary angiography to detect significant coronary artery disease in patients referred for cardiac valve surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 48(8):1658–1665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.06.054CrossRefPubMed

39.

Meijboom WB, Weustink AC, Pugliese F N et al (2007) Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in women versus men with angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 100(10):1532–1537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.06.061

40.

Mendoza - Rodríguez V, Llerena LR, Llerena LD et al (2008) Ischemic Heart disease diagnosed by 64 slice computed tomography coronary angiography. Int. J. Cardiol. (7) 2.

41.

Ovrehus KA, Jensen JK, Mickley HF et al (2010) Comparison of usefulness of exercise testing versus coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of patients suspected of having coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 105(6):773–779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.11.006CrossRefPubMed

42.

Ovrehus KA, Munkholm H, Bottcher M, Botker HE, Norgaard BL (2010) Coronary computed tomographic angiography in patients suspected of coronary artery disease: impact of observer experience on diagnostic performance and interobserver reproducibility. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 4(3):186–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2010.03.010CrossRefPubMed

43.

Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Plass A et al (2006) Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol 16(12):2739–2747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0474-0CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Shabestari AA, Abdi S, Akhlaghpoor S et al (2007) Diagnostic performance of 64-channel multislice computed tomography in assessment of significant coronary artery disease in symptomatic subjects. Am J Cardiol 99(12):1656–1661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.01.040CrossRefPubMed

45.

Sun K, Han RJ, Cui LF et al (2013) Feasibility and diagnostic accuracy for assessment of coronary artery stenosis of prospectively electrocardiogram-gated high-pitch spiral acquisition mode dual-source CT coronary angiography in patients with relatively higher heart rates: in comparison with catheter coronary angiography. Chin Med Sci J = Chung-kuo i hsueh k'o hsueh tsa chih / Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences 27(4):213–219

46.

Ugolini P, Pressacco J, Lesperance J et al (2009) Evaluation of coronary atheroma by 64-slice multidetector computed tomography: comparison with intravascular ultrasound and angiography. Can J Cardiol 25(11):641–647CrossRef

47.

Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE et al (2003) The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Group. Croat Med J 44(5):639–650PubMed

48.

La Grutta L, Malago R, Toia P et al (2019) Clinical relevance of myocardial bridging detected by coronary CT angiography in patients with atypical chest pain. Minerva Cardioangiol 67(1):84–86. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4725.18.04649-2CrossRefPubMed

49.

Feger S, Elzenbeck L, Rieckmann N et al (2021) Effect of computed tomography versus invasive coronary angiography on statin adherence: a randomized controlled trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 14(7):1480–1483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2021.01.032CrossRefPubMed

50.

Haberl R, Becker A, Leber A et al (2001) Correlation of coronary calcification and angiographically documented stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: results of 1,764 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 37(2):451–457CrossRef

51.

Gottlieb I, Miller JM, Arbab-Zadeh A et al (2010) 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 55(7):627–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.07.072CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

52.

Meyer M, Henzler T, Fink C Jr et al (2012) Impact of coronary calcium score on the prevalence of coronary artery stenosis on dual source CT coronary angiography in caucasian patients with an intermediate risk. Acad Radiol 19(11):1316–1323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2012.06.006

53.

Liu YC, Sun Z, Tsay PK et al (2013) Significance of coronary calcification for prediction of coronary artery disease and cardiac events based on 64-slice coronary computed tomography angiography. Biomed Res Int 2013:472347. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/472347CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Nieman K, Galema TW, Neefjes LA et al (2009) Comparison of the value of coronary calcium detection to computed tomographic angiography and exercise testing in patients with chest pain. Am J Cardiol 104(11):1499–1504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.07.011CrossRefPubMed

55.

Rubinshtein R, Gaspar T, Halon DA, Goldstein J, Peled N, Lewis BS (2007) Prevalence and extent of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients with zero or low calcium score undergoing 64-slice cardiac multidetector computed tomography for evaluation of a chest pain syndrome. Am J Cardiol 99(4):472–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.08.060CrossRefPubMed

56.

Alqarqaz M, Zaidan M, Al-Mallah MH (2011) Prevalence and predictors of atherosclerosis in symptomatic patients with zero calcium score. Acad Radiol 18(11):1437–1441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2011.07.012CrossRefPubMed

57.

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(3):552–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2005.05.056CrossRefPubMed

58.

Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU et al (2014) ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 63(4):380–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.11.009CrossRefPubMed

Title: Computed tomography angiography versus Agatston score for diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with stable chest pain: individual patient data meta-analysis of the international COME-CCT Consortium
Authors: Viktoria Wieske
Mario Walther
Benjamin Dubourg
Hatem Alkadhi
Bjarne L. Nørgaard
Matthijs F. L. Meijs
Axel C. P. Diederichsen
Yung-Liang Wan
Hans Mickley
Konstantin Nikolaou
Abbas A. Shabestari
Bjørn A. Halvorsen
Eugenio Martuscelli
Kai Sun
Bernhard A. Herzog
Roy P. Marcus
Sebastian Leschka
Mario J. Garcia
Kristian A. Ovrehus
Juhani Knuuti
Vladymir Mendoza-Rodriguez
Nuno Bettencourt
Simone Muraglia
Ronny R. Buechel
Philipp A. Kaufmann
Elke Zimmermann
Jean-Claude Tardif
Matthew J. Budoff
Peter Schlattmann
Marc Dewey
on behalf of the COME-CCT Consortium
Publication date: 10-03-2022
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Angiography
CT Angiography
Arterial Diseases
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 8/2022
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08619-4

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Computed tomography angiography versus Agatston score for diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with stable chest pain: individual patient data meta-analysis of the international COME-CCT Consortium

Abstract

Objectives

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2022

Contrast-enhanced MRI could predict response of systemic therapy in advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Risk stratification of LI-RADS M and LI-RADS 4/5 combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma: prognostic values of MR imaging features and clinicopathological factors

Multiparametric MRI-based radiomics model to predict pelvic lymph node invasion for patients with prostate cancer

Microwave ablation treatment for medically inoperable stage I non-small cell lung cancers: long-term results

Quality and safety of coronary computed tomography angiography at academic and non-academic sites: insights from a large European registry (ESCR MR/CT Registry)

Notifications and alerts in patient dose values for computed tomography and fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures