Diagnostic Accuracy of Coronary Computed Tomography Before Aortic Valve Replacement: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Preprocedural assessment of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Rationale and design of the EASE-IT CT registry

BACKGROUND

Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the standard for pre-procedural assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, it requires hospitalization and can be associated with complications. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) may be a viable alternative to rule out prognostically relevant CAD.

METHODS

The EASE-IT CT Registry is an investigator-initiated, prospective, observational, multicentre pilot registry involving patients aged ≥75 years with severe aortic stenosis (AS) intended to implant a transcatheter heart valve (THV) of the SAPIEN family. A total of 150 patients will be recruited from four sites in Germany and Austria. The registry will consist of two prospective cohorts: the investigational CTA-only cohort and the CTA + ICA control cohort. The CTA-only cohort will enrol 100 patients in whom significant (≥50%) left main (LM) and/or proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) stenosis are ruled out on CTA. The CTA + ICA control cohort will enrol 50 patients who have undergone both CTA and ICA before TAVI and in whom ≥50% LM/proximal LAD stenosis has been ruled out by CTA. Three composite endpoints will be assessed at 3 months post-TAVI: CAD-specific endpoints, VARC-3-defined device success and early safety.

CONCLUSION

The EASE-IT CT Registry evaluates whether TAVI can be carried out safely without performing ICA if prognostically relevant CAD of the LM/proximal LAD is ruled out with CTA. If so, the omission of ICA would help streamline the pre-procedural workup of TAVI patients.

An exemplary reanalysis of coronary computed tomography angiography diagnostic meta-analyses shows insufficient data sharing and incorrect sensitivity and specificity estimates

OBJECTIVES

To systematically evaluate the reproducibility of primary data and, the reproducibility and correctness of pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates reported in a sample of diagnostic meta-analyses.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted an exemplary systematic review of diagnostic meta-analyses comparing coronary computed tomography angiography to invasive coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. The objectives were to assess 1) the reproducibility of contingency tables, 2) the reproducibility of pooled sensitivity and specificity, and 3) differences to reported results when applying a recommended bivariate binomial model for pooling sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, we reproduced the contingency tables and recalculated sensitivity and specificity by utilizing both the pooling method of each meta-analysis and a bivariate binomial model. We used linear trends to assess the improvement of these objectives over time.

RESULTS

We identified 38 diagnostic meta-analyses, each including on average 19 primary studies (range: 3 to 89 studies; total: 715-including duplicates) with an average of approximately 1800 patients per meta-analysis (range: 118 to 7516 patients). For 31 meta-analyses (82%, 95% CI: 65%, 91%), the contingency tables were reproducible; however, only 15 published them. Using the pooling method of each meta-analysis, we obtained comparable recalculated sensitivities/specificities for 28 meta-analyses (74% [57%, 86%]). Only 11 meta-analyses pooled sensitivity/specificity using a bivariate binomial model (29% [16%, 46%]). When all meta-analyses were pooled with this model, published sensitivities/specificities were confirmed for 19 of 38 meta-analyses (50% [34%, 66%]). There was only marginal improvement in data availability and application of recommended pooling methods over time.

CONCLUSION

Data sharing should become standard practice along with the use of appropriate pooling methods. Journal publication requirements may play a key role in enhancing the quality of scientific reporting and methodological standards which may lead to more reliable and consistent outcomes. The ability to reproduce sensitivity and specificity estimates in diagnostic imaging meta-analyses is dependent on the availability of contingency tables and the explicit reporting of pooling methods and software used.

Utility of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression Based on Published Data from 7458 Patients

BACKGROUND

Coronary CT angiography (CCTA) may detect coronary artery disease (CAD) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients and may obviate invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in selected patients. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA for detecting CAD in TAVI patients based on published data.

METHODS

Meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed based on a comprehensive electronic search, including relevant studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA in the setting of TAVI patients compared to ICA. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), were calculated on a patient and per segment level.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 studies (total of 7458 patients) were included. On the patient level, the CCTA's pooled sensitivity and NPV were 95% (95% CI: 93-97%) and 97% (95% CI: 95-98%), respectively, while the specificity and PPV were at 73% (95% CI: 62-82%) and 64% (95% CI: 57-71%), respectively. On the segmental coronary vessel level, the sensitivity and NPV were 90% (95% CI: 79-96%) and 98% (95% CI: 97-99%).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis highlights CCTA's potential as a first-line diagnostic tool although its limited PPV and specificity may pose challenges when interpreting heavily calcified arteries. This study underscores the need for further research and protocol standardization in this area.

Combined CT Coronary Artery Assessment and TAVI Planning

Computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the aorta and the iliofemoral arteries is crucial for preprocedural planning of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), because it provides details on a variety of aspects required for heart team decision-making. In addition to providing relevant diagnostic information on the degree of aortic valve calcification, CTA allows for a customized choice of the transcatheter heart valve system and the TAVI access route. Furthermore, current guidelines recommend the exclusion of relevant coronary artery disease (CAD) prior to TAVI. The feasibility of coronary artery assessment with CTA in patients scheduled for TAVI has been established previously, and accumulating data support its value. In addition, fractional flow reserve determined from CTA (CT–FFR) and machine learning-based CT–FFR were recently shown to improve its diagnostic yield for this purpose. However, the utilization of CTA for coronary artery evaluation remains limited in this specific population of patients due to the relatively high risk of CAD coexistence with severe AS. Therefore, the current diagnostic work-up prior to TAVI routinely includes invasive catheter coronary angiography at most centers. In this article, the authors address technological prerequisites and CT protocol considerations, discuss pitfalls, review the current literature regarding combined CTA coronary artery assessment and preprocedural TAVI evaluation, and provide an overview of unanswered questions and future research goals within the field.

Diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography for the evaluation of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for the evaluation of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS

EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, and CENTRAL were searched for studies reporting accuracy of CCTA for the evaluation of obstructive CAD compared with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference standard. QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias. A bivariate random effects model was used to analyze, pool, and plot the diagnostic performance measurements across studies. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive ( + LR) and negative (-LR) likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and hierarchical summary ROC curve (HSROC) were evaluated. Prospero registration number: CRD42021252527.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (2533 patients) were included. In the intention-to-diagnose patient-level analysis, sensitivity and specificity for CCTA were 97% (95% CI: 94-98%) and 68% (95% CI: 56-68%), respectively, and + LR and -LR were 3.0 (95% CI: 2.1-4.3) and 0.05 (95% CI: 0.03 - 0.09), with DOR equal to 60 (95% CI: 30-121). The area under the HSROC curve was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94-0.98). No significant difference in sensitivity was found between single-heartbeat and other CT scanners (96% (95% CI: 90 - 99%) vs. 97% (95% CI: 94-98%) respectively; p = 0.37), whereas the specificity of single-heartbeat scanners was higher (82% (95% CI: 66-92%) vs. 60% (95% CI: 46 - 72%) respectively; p < 0.0001). Routine CCTA in the pre-TAVI workup could save 41% (95% CI: 34 - 47%) of ICAs if a disease prevalence of 40% is assumed.

CONCLUSIONS

CCTA proved an excellent diagnostic accuracy for assessing obstructive CAD in patients referred for TAVI; the use of single-heartbeat CT scanners can further improve these findings.

KEY POINTS

• CCTA proved to have an excellent diagnostic accuracy for assessing obstructive CAD in patients referred for TAVI. • Routine CCTA in the pre-TAVI workup could save more than 40% of ICAs. • Single-heartbeat CT scanners had higher specificity than others in the assessment of obstructive CAD in patients referred for TAVI.

The diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with and without previous coronary interventions

BACKGROUND

Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the gold standard for imaging coronary arteries and the severity of coronary artery disease (CAD). Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has undergone remarkable progress in the diagnosis of CAD.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of prior vs no previous coronary interventions on the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA as an alternative to ICA to improve health outcomes for patients with suspected CAD.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was carried out among patients suspected of CAD and for evaluation of grafts and stents to investigate recurrent ischemic symptoms. 120 patients imaged by CCTA were then referred to ICA, which is considered the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of CCTA were assessed relative to ICA.

RESULTS

Based on a per-patient analysis, the comparison with ICA reveals variations in sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of CCTA. In patients without any previous coronary interventions, the sensitivity was 97.8%, and specificity was 95.6%. The PPV and NPV were 97.8% and 95.5%, respectively. Regarding patients with coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG), the sensitivity was 95% and specificity 100%. The PPV and NPV were 100% and 90.9%, respectively. Regarding patients with prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the results were a sensitivity of 84.6%, specificity of 77.8%, PPV of 84.6% and NPV of 77.8%.

CONCLUSION

CCTA is a powerful diagnostic tool, especially for the evaluation of the major coronary arteries and evaluation of patients with prior CABG. ICA is recommended for evaluation of patients with an intracoronary stent.

Aortic Valve Disease and Associated Complex CAD: The Interventional Approach

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is highly prevalent in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). The management of CAD is a central aspect of the work-up of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), but few data are available on this field and the best percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practice is yet to be determined. A major challenge is the ability to elucidate the severity of bystander coronary stenosis independently of the severity of aortic valve stenosis and subsequent impact on blood flow. The prognostic role of CAD in patients undergoing TAVI is being still debated and the benefits and the best timing of PCI in this context are currently under evaluation. Additionally, PCI in the setting of advanced AS poses some technical challenges, due to the complex anatomy, risk of hemodynamic instability, and the increased risk of bleeding complications. This review aims to provide a comprehensive synthesis of the available literature on myocardial revascularization in patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI. This work can assist the Heart Team in individualizing decisions about myocardial revascularization, taking into account available diagnostic tools as well as the risks and benefits.

Coronary computed tomography angiography versus invasive coronary angiography: medical staff perceptions and diagnostic interest in Gaza-Palestine

BACKGROUND

Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) are used in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). The medical benefits, as well as the ethical and logistical implications, should be explored, particularly in the scarcity of medical resources. We explore the perception of medical staff toward the interest of CCTA and ICA in diagnosis CAD to maximize the utility of both procedures.

METHODS

A triangulated observational, analytical prospective cohort study carried out among patients suspected with CAD who underwent CCTA and ICA. The quantitative part included 381 patients (250 underwent ICA and 131 underwent CCTA). The qualitative part included a purposive sample of two radiologists, three cardiologists, and two medical imaging specialists.

RESULTS

Low diagnostic yield of the ICA through 31.3% and 39.7% diagnosed without CAD and non-significant CAD, respectively. Risk factors such as the family history of heart disease, obesity, high cholesterol, and diabetes were with high frequency in the patients with significant CAD. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CCTA technique was 94.74%, 94.23%, 92.31%, and 96.08% respectively. Cardiologist's perceptions focused on radiation concerns and difficulties for convincing patients to perform the CCTA procedure. Radiologists and medical imaging specialists focused on complete cooperation from the cardiologist to better preparation of patients to perform optimal CCTA procedures.

CONCLUSION

Efficient diagnostic benefits of CCTA and overuse of ICA for stable CAD are documented. Clear diagnostic strategy with medical, ethical, and logistical issues should be considered when selecting the CCTA or ICA for diagnosis CAD.

Combined Coronary CT-Angiography and TAVI-Planning: A Contrast-Neutral Routine Approach for Ruling-out Significant Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

Significant coronary artery disease (CAD) is a common finding in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Assessment of CAD prior to TAVI is recommended by current guidelines and is mainly performed via invasive coronary angiography (ICA). In this study we analyzed the ability of coronary CT-angiography (cCTA) to rule out significant CAD (stenosis ≥ 50%) during routine pre-TAVI evaluation in patients with high pre-test probability for CAD.

METHODS

In total, 460 consecutive patients undergoing pre-TAVI CT (mean age 79.6 ± 7.4 years) were included. All patients were examined with a retrospectively ECG-gated CT-scan of the heart, followed by a high-pitch-scan of the vascular access route utilizing a single intravenous bolus of 70 ml iodinated contrast medium. Images were evaluated for image quality, calcifications, and significant CAD; CT-examinations in which CAD could not be ruled out were defined as positive (CAD+). Routinely, patients received ICA (388/460; 84.3%; Group A), which was omitted if renal function was impaired and CAD was ruled out on cCTA (Group B). Following TAVI, clinical events were documented during the hospital stay.

RESULTS

cCTA was negative for CAD in 40.2% (188/460). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV in Group A were 97.8%, 45.2%, 49.6%, and 97.4%, respectively. Median coronary artery calcium score (CAC) was higher in CAD+-patients but did not have predictive value for correct classification of patients with cCTA. There were no significant differences in clinical events between Group A and B.

CONCLUSION

cCTA can be incorporated into pre-TAVI CT-evaluation with no need for additional contrast medium. cCTA may exclude significant CAD in a relatively high percentage of these high-risk patients. Thereby, cCTA may have the potential to reduce the need for ICA and total amount of contrast medium applied, possibly making pre-procedural evaluation for TAVI safer and faster.

CT in planning transcatheter aortic valve implantation procedures and risk assessment

For surgical aortic valve replacement, the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (STSS) is the reference standard for the prediction of operative risk. In transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) though, where the procedure itself is minimally invasive, the traditional risk assessment is supplemented by CTA. Through a consistent approach to the acquisition of high-quality images and the standardised reporting of annular measurements and adverse root and vascular features, patients at risk of complications can be identified. In turn, this may allow for a personalised procedural approach and treatment strategies devised to potentially reduce or mitigate this risk. This article provides a systematic and standardised approach to pre-procedural work-up with computed tomography angiography (CTA) and explores the current state of evidence and future areas of development in this rapidly developing field.