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)

Impact of smoking in patients with suspected coronary artery disease in the randomised DISCHARGE trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate if the effect of cardiac computed tomography (CT) vs. invasive coronary angiography (ICA) on cardiovascular events differs based on smoking status.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This pre-specified subgroup analysis of the pragmatic, prospective, multicentre, randomised DISCHARGE trial (NCT02400229) involved 3561 patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or stroke). Secondary endpoints included an expanded MACE composite (MACE, transient ischaemic attack, or major procedure-related complications).

RESULTS

Of 3445 randomised patients with smoking data (mean age 59.1 years + / - 9.7, 1151 men), at 3.5-year follow-up, the effect of CT vs. ICA on MACE was consistent across smoking groups (p for interaction = 0.98). The percutaneous coronary intervention rate was significantly lower with a CT-first strategy in smokers and former smokers (p = 0.01 for both). A CT-first strategy reduced the hazard of major procedure-related complications (HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.81; p = 0.045) across smoking groups. In current smokers, the expanded MACE composite was lower in the CT- compared to the ICA-first strategy (2.3% (8) vs 6.0% (18), HR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.17, 0.88). The rate of non-obstructive CAD was significantly higher in all three smoking groups in the CT-first strategy.

CONCLUSION

For patients with stable chest pain referred for ICA, the clinical outcomes of CT were consistent across smoking status. The CT-first approach led to a higher detection rate of non-obstructive CAD and fewer major procedure-related complications in smokers.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

This pre-specified sub-analysis of the DISCHARGE trial confirms that a CT-first strategy in patients with stable chest pain referred for invasive coronary angiography with an intermediate pre-test probability of coronary artery disease is as effective as and safer than invasive coronary angiography, irrespective of smoking status.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02400229.

KEY POINTS

• No randomised studies have assessed smoking status on CT effectiveness in symptomatic patients referred for invasive coronary angiography. • A CT-first strategy results in comparable adverse events, fewer complications, and increased coronary artery disease detection, irrespective of smoking status. • A CT-first strategy is safe and effective for stable chest pain patients with intermediate pre-test probability for CAD, including never smokers.

Combination of computed tomography angiography with coronary artery calcium score for improved diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of stable chest pain patients referred for invasive coronary angiography

OBJECTIVES

Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has higher diagnostic accuracy than coronary artery calcium (CAC) score for detecting obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with stable chest pain, while the added diagnostic value of combining CCTA with CAC is unknown. We investigated whether combining coronary CCTA with CAC score can improve the diagnosis of obstructive CAD compared with CCTA alone.

METHODS

A total of 2315 patients (858 women, 37%) aged 61.1 ± 10.2 from 29 original studies were included to build two CAD prediction models based on either CCTA alone or CCTA combined with the CAC score. CAD was defined as at least 50% coronary diameter stenosis on invasive coronary angiography. Models were built by using generalized linear mixed-effects models with a random intercept set for the original study. The two CAD prediction models were compared by the likelihood ratio test, while their diagnostic performance was compared using the area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC). Net benefit (benefit of true positive versus harm of false positive) was assessed by decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

CAD prevalence was 43.5% (1007/2315). Combining CCTA with CAC improved CAD diagnosis compared with CCTA alone (AUC: 87% [95% CI: 86 to 89%] vs. 80% [95% CI: 78 to 82%]; p < 0.001), likelihood ratio test 236.3, df: 1, p < 0.001, showing a higher net benefit across almost all threshold probabilities.

CONCLUSION

Adding the CAC score to CCTA findings in patients with stable chest pain improves the diagnostic performance in detecting CAD and the net benefit compared with CCTA alone.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

CAC scoring CT performed before coronary CTA and included in the diagnostic model can improve obstructive CAD diagnosis, especially when CCTA is non-diagnostic.

KEY POINTS

• The combination of coronary artery calcium with coronary computed tomography angiography showed significantly higher AUC (87%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 86 to 89%) for diagnosis of coronary artery disease compared to coronary computed tomography angiography alone (80%, 95% CI: 78 to 82%, p < 0.001). • Diagnostic improvement was mostly seen in patients with non-diagnostic C. • The improvement in diagnostic performance and the net benefit was consistent across age groups, chest pain types, and genders.

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.

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

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.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-022-08619-4.

Comparison of Whole Heart Computed Tomography Scanners for Image Quality Lower Radiation Dosing in Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: The CONVERGE Registry

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Novel technology in coronary computed tomographic angiography allows assessment of coronary artery disease with high image quality (IQ). There are currently two wide detector "whole heart" coverage scanners available, which avoid misregistration artifacts. However, there are no data directly comparing IQ between the two scanners. The aim of the current study is to investigate if IQ is different between the most scanners of GE and Toshiba broad detector scanners.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective, observational, multicenter international cohort study comparing 236 consecutive patients who underwent coronary computed tomographic angiography using whole-heart scanners; 126 patients on scanner S1 ( Aquilion ONE Vision, Toshiba), and 110 patients on scanner S2 (Revolution CT, GE Healthcare). Hounsfield units were measured using regions of interest in the descending aorta at 6 points (cranial slice, level of the visualized first, second, third, and fourth spines, and the caudal slice). We also compared the coverage length (z-axis) of the full width field of view between a single rotation of the two scanners.

RESULTS

Evaluating mean CT attenuation values Hounsfield units through the scan range, are progressively reduced across the descending aorta in the S1 group, resulting in the larger difference of contrast brightness between the cranial and caudal slices compared to the S2 group (absolute difference: S2 13.0 ± 4.4 vs S1 141.9 ± 16.4, p < 0.0001; Percent difference: 19.3 ± 2.1 vs -3.4 ± 1.2, <0.0001). The standard deviation (SD) is similar at the cranial slice between the two scanners, however, the S1 group demonstrated higher SD-differential from cranial to caudal than S2 group. Median radiation exposure was significantly lower for the S2 scanner 1.50 ± 0.75 mSv vs the S1 system 1.9 mSv (IQR 1.7-2.7 mSv) (p = 0.01). Z-axis coverage was larger for the S2 scanner 152.5 mm (244 slices × 0.625 mm/slice) than 133 mm for S1 (266 slices × 0.5 mm/slice).

CONCLUSION

Although both "volume" scanners cover the whole heart z-axis with one beat, scans using the S1 scanner have a larger variability in attenuation values throughout the scan range, resulting in 20% increase in nonuniformity from cranial to caudal slice. Additionally, SD variation across the field of view, a metric of noise, is larger when using the S1 scanner vs the S2 scanner. These results indicate that the GE Revolution CT has more uniform contrast enhancement and more coverage, lower radiation and lower image noise compared to the Toshiba Aquilion ONE Vision system.

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

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) should be performed in patients with any clinical probability of coronary artery disease (CAD), and whether the diagnostic performance differs between subgroups of patients.

DESIGN

Prospectively designed meta-analysis of individual patient data from prospective diagnostic accuracy studies.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for published studies. Unpublished studies were identified via direct contact with participating investigators.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Prospective diagnostic accuracy studies that compared coronary CTA with coronary angiography as the reference standard, using at least a 50% diameter reduction as a cutoff value for obstructive CAD. All patients needed to have a clinical indication for coronary angiography due to suspected CAD, and both tests had to be performed in all patients. Results had to be provided using 2×2 or 3×2 cross tabulations for the comparison of CTA with coronary angiography. Primary outcomes were the positive and negative predictive values of CTA as a function of clinical pretest probability of obstructive CAD, analysed by a generalised linear mixed model; calculations were performed including and excluding non-diagnostic CTA results. The no-treat/treat threshold model was used to determine the range of appropriate pretest probabilities for CTA. The threshold model was based on obtained post-test probabilities of less than 15% in case of negative CTA and above 50% in case of positive CTA. Sex, angina pectoris type, age, and number of computed tomography detector rows were used as clinical variables to analyse the diagnostic performance in relevant subgroups.

RESULTS

Individual patient data from 5332 patients from 65 prospective diagnostic accuracy studies were retrieved. For a pretest probability range of 7-67%, the treat threshold of more than 50% and the no-treat threshold of less than 15% post-test probability were obtained using CTA. At a pretest probability of 7%, the positive predictive value of CTA was 50.9% (95% confidence interval 43.3% to 57.7%) and the negative predictive value of CTA was 97.8% (96.4% to 98.7%); corresponding values at a pretest probability of 67% were 82.7% (78.3% to 86.2%) and 85.0% (80.2% to 88.9%), respectively. The overall sensitivity of CTA was 95.2% (92.6% to 96.9%) and the specificity was 79.2% (74.9% to 82.9%). CTA using more than 64 detector rows was associated with a higher empirical sensitivity than CTA using up to 64 rows (93.4% v 86.5%, P=0.002) and specificity (84.4% v 72.6%, P<0.001). The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for CTA was 0.897 (0.889 to 0.906), and the diagnostic performance of CTA was slightly lower in women than in with men (area under the curve 0.874 (0.858 to 0.890) v 0.907 (0.897 to 0.916), P<0.001). The diagnostic performance of CTA was slightly lower in patients older than 75 (0.864 (0.834 to 0.894), P=0.018 v all other age groups) and was not significantly influenced by angina pectoris type (typical angina 0.895 (0.873 to 0.917), atypical angina 0.898 (0.884 to 0.913), non-anginal chest pain 0.884 (0.870 to 0.899), other chest discomfort 0.915 (0.897 to 0.934)).

CONCLUSIONS

In a no-treat/treat threshold model, the diagnosis of obstructive CAD using coronary CTA in patients with stable chest pain was most accurate when the clinical pretest probability was between 7% and 67%. Performance of CTA was not influenced by the angina pectoris type and was slightly higher in men and lower in older patients.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42012002780.

Applicability and accuracy of pretest probability calculations implemented in the NICE clinical guideline for decision making about imaging in patients with chest pain of recent onset

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the implementation, applicability and accuracy of the pretest probability calculation provided by NICE clinical guideline 95 for decision making about imaging in patients with chest pain of recent onset.

METHODS

The definitions for pretest probability calculation in the original Duke clinical score and the NICE guideline were compared. We also calculated the agreement and disagreement in pretest probability and the resulting imaging and management groups based on individual patient data from the Collaborative Meta-Analysis of Cardiac CT (CoMe-CCT).

RESULTS

4,673 individual patient data from the CoMe-CCT Consortium were analysed. Major differences in definitions in the Duke clinical score and NICE guideline were found for the predictors age and number of risk factors. Pretest probability calculation using guideline criteria was only possible for 30.8 % (1,439/4,673) of patients despite availability of all required data due to ambiguity in guideline definitions for risk factors and age groups. Agreement regarding patient management groups was found in only 70 % (366/523) of patients in whom pretest probability calculation was possible according to both models.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that pretest probability calculation for clinical decision making about cardiac imaging as implemented in the NICE clinical guideline for patients has relevant limitations.

KEY POINTS

• Duke clinical score is not implemented correctly in NICE guideline 95. • Pretest probability assessment in NICE guideline 95 is impossible for most patients. • Improved clinical decision making requires accurate pretest probability calculation. • These refinements are essential for appropriate use of cardiac CT.

Computed tomography versus invasive coronary angiography: design and methods of the pragmatic randomised multicentre DISCHARGE trial

OBJECTIVES

More than 3.5 million invasive coronary angiographies (ICA) are performed in Europe annually. Approximately 2 million of these invasive procedures might be reduced by noninvasive tests because no coronary intervention is performed. Computed tomography (CT) is the most accurate noninvasive test for detection and exclusion of coronary artery disease (CAD). To investigate the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA, we designed the European pragmatic multicentre DISCHARGE trial funded by the 7th Framework Programme of the European Union (EC-GA 603266).

METHODS

In this trial, patients with a low-to-intermediate pretest probability (10-60 %) of suspected CAD and a clinical indication for ICA because of stable chest pain will be randomised in a 1-to-1 ratio to CT or ICA. CT and ICA findings guide subsequent management decisions by the local heart teams according to current evidence and European guidelines.

RESULTS

Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke as a composite endpoint will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary and other outcomes include cost-effectiveness, radiation exposure, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), socioeconomic status, lifestyle, adverse events related to CT/ICA, and gender differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The DISCHARGE trial will assess the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA.

KEY POINTS

• Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. • Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the reference standard for detection of CAD. • Noninvasive computed tomography angiography excludes CAD with high sensitivity. • CT may effectively reduce the approximately 2 million negative ICAs in Europe. • DISCHARGE addresses this hypothesis in patients with low-to-intermediate pretest probability for CAD.

Acceptance of Combined Coronary CT Angiography and Myocardial CT Perfusion versus Conventional Coronary Angiography in Patients with Coronary Stents--Intraindividual Comparison

Objectives

To evaluate how well patients with coronary stents accept combined coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) and myocardial CT perfusion (CTP) compared with conventional coronary angiography (CCA).

Background

While combined CTA and CTP may improve diagnostic accuracy compared with CTA alone, patient acceptance of CTA/CTP remains to be defined.

Methods

A total of 90 patients with coronary stents prospectively underwent CTA/CTP (both with contrast agent, CTP with adenosine) and CCA as part of the CARS-320 study. In this group, an intraindividual comparison of patient acceptance of CTA, CTP, and CCA was performed.

Results

CTP was experienced to be significantly more painful than CTA (p<0.001) and was associated with a higher frequency of dyspnea (p<0.001). Comparison of CTA/CTP with CCA revealed no significant differences in terms of pain (p = 0.141) and comfort (p = 0.377). Concern before CTA/CTP and CCA and overall satisfaction were likewise not significantly different (p = 0.097 and p = 0.123, respectively). Nevertheless, about two thirds (n = 60, 68%) preferred CTA/CTP to CCA (p<0.001). Moreover, patients felt less helpless during CTA/CTP than during CCA (p = 0.026). Lack of invasiveness and absence of pain were the most frequently mentioned advantages of CTA/CTP over CCA in our patient population.

Conclusions

CCA and combined CTA/CTP are equally well accepted by patients; however, more patients prefer CTA/CTP. CTP was associated with more intense pain than CTA and more frequently caused dyspnea than CTA alone.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00967876

Cardiac magnetic resonance and computed tomography angiography for clinical imaging of stable coronary artery disease. Diagnostic classification and risk stratification

Despite advances in the pharmacologic and interventional treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD), atherosclerosis remains the leading cause of death in Western societies. X-ray coronary angiography has been the modality of choice for diagnosing the presence and extent of CAD. However, this technique is invasive and provides limited information on the composition of atherosclerotic plaque. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) have emerged as promising non-invasive techniques for the clinical imaging of CAD. Hereby, CCTA allows for visualization of coronary calcification, lumen narrowing and atherosclerotic plaque composition. In this regard, data from the CONFIRM Registry recently demonstrated that both atherosclerotic plaque burden and lumen narrowing exhibit incremental value for the prediction of future cardiac events. However, due to technical limitations with CCTA, resulting in false positive or negative results in the presence of severe calcification or motion artifacts, this technique cannot entirely replace invasive angiography at the present time. CMR on the other hand, provides accurate assessment of the myocardial function due to its high spatial and temporal resolution and intrinsic blood-to-tissue contrast. Hereby, regional wall motion and perfusion abnormalities, during dobutamine or vasodilator stress, precede the development of ST-segment depression and anginal symptoms enabling the detection of functionally significant CAD. While CT generally offers better spatial resolution, the versatility of CMR can provide information on myocardial function, perfusion, and viability, all without ionizing radiation for the patients. Technical developments with these 2 non-invasive imaging tools and their current implementation in the clinical imaging of CAD will be presented and discussed herein.

Minimally invasive endoscopic staging for mediastinal lymphadenopathy in lung cancer: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive endoscopic biopsy techniques have been widely available as potential alternatives for mediastinal lesions staging in patients with known or suspected lung cancer. Previous efforts have been made to evaluate the diagnostic performance of specific endoscopic modality alone at the level of the mediastinum for staging lung cancer, however, few studies focus on the accuracy of comparisons between different endoscopic modalities, especially at the level of any individual lymph node station. The objective of our study is to determine the diagnostic yields of different endoscopic modalities for staging mediastinal lymphadenopathy in lung cancer, especially concerning the individual lymph node station.

METHODS/DESIGN

A systematic electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, SinoMed and ISI Web of Science were performed to identify studies evaluating endoscopic modalities accuracy with restriction of English and Chinese languages from inception to an update until May 2014. Data were extracted with the patient as the unit of analysis with regards to the abilities of different endoscopic modalities at the level of mediastinum and particular lymph node station. The methodological quality was assessed independently according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Study (QADAS) criteria. An exact binomial rendition of bivariate mixed-effects regression model was used to estimate the pooled sensitivity and specificity. Also, pre-post probability analysis, publication bias analysis and sensitivity analysis were performed for a synthesis of knowledge of this context.

DISSEMINATION

The findings will advance our better available knowledge of optimal clinical decision-making when dealing with staging of mediastinal metastasis in lung cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO-NIHR Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42014009792).