Time efficiency and diagnostic accuracy of new automated myocardial perfusion analysis software in 320-row CT cardiac imaging

Detection of Endoleaks Following Thoracic and Abdominal Aortic Endovascular Aortic Repair-: A Comparison of Standard and Dynamic 4D-Computed Tomography Angiography

PURPOSE

Endoleaks are a common complication after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The detection and correct classification of endoleaks is essential for the further treatment of affected patients. However, standard computed tomography angiography (CTA) provides no hemodynamic information on endoleaks, which can result in misclassification in complex cases. The aim of this study was to compare standard CTA (sCTA) with dynamic, dual-energy CTA (dCTA) for detection and classification of endoleaks following EVAR or TEVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective evaluation compared 69 sCTA diagnostic examinations performed on 50 different patients with 89 dCTA diagnostic examinations performed on 69 different patients.

RESULTS

In total, 15.9% of sCTA examinations and 49.4% of dCTA examinations led to the detection of endoleaks. With sCTA, 20.0% of patients were diagnosed with endoleaks, while with dCTA, 37.7% of patients were diagnosed with endoleaks. With sCTA, mainly Type 1 endoleaks were detected, whereas, with dCTA, the types of detected endoleaks were more evenly distributed. In comparison with the literature, the frequencies of endoleak types detected with dCTA better reflect the natural distribution than the frequencies detected with standard CTA.

CONCLUSION

Based on the retrospective comparative evaluation, dCTA could pose a valuable supplementary diagnostic tool resulting in a more accurate and realistic detection and classification of suspected endoleaks.

Selection and Reporting of Statistical Methods to Assess Reliability of a Diagnostic Test: Conformity to Recommended Methods in a Peer-Reviewed Journal

Objective

To evaluate the frequency and adequacy of statistical analyses in a general radiology journal when reporting a reliability analysis for a diagnostic test.

Materials and Methods

Sixty-three studies of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) and 36 studies reporting reliability analyses published in the Korean Journal of Radiology between 2012 and 2016 were analyzed. Studies were judged using the methodological guidelines of the Radiological Society of North America-Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (RSNA-QIBA), and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) initiative. DTA studies were evaluated by nine editorial board members of the journal. Reliability studies were evaluated by study reviewers experienced with reliability analysis.

Results

Thirty-one (49.2%) of the 63 DTA studies did not include a reliability analysis when deemed necessary. Among the 36 reliability studies, proper statistical methods were used in all (5/5) studies dealing with dichotomous/nominal data, 46.7% (7/15) of studies dealing with ordinal data, and 95.2% (20/21) of studies dealing with continuous data. Statistical methods were described in sufficient detail regarding weighted kappa in 28.6% (2/7) of studies and regarding the model and assumptions of intraclass correlation coefficient in 35.3% (6/17) and 29.4% (5/17) of studies, respectively. Reliability parameters were used as if they were agreement parameters in 23.1% (3/13) of studies. Reproducibility and repeatability were used incorrectly in 20% (3/15) of studies.

Conclusion

Greater attention to the importance of reporting reliability, thorough description of the related statistical methods, efforts not to neglect agreement parameters, and better use of relevant terminology is necessary.

Does the Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, as Defined by STARD 2015, Affect Citation?

Objective

To determine the rate with which diagnostic test accuracy studies that are published in a general radiology journal adhere to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015, and to explore the relationship between adherence rate and citation rate while avoiding confounding by journal factors.

Materials and Methods

All eligible diagnostic test accuracy studies that were published in the Korean Journal of Radiology in 2011–2015 were identified. Five reviewers assessed each article for yes/no compliance with 27 of the 30 STARD 2015 checklist items (items 28, 29, and 30 were excluded). The total STARD score (number of fulfilled STARD items) was calculated. The score of the 15 STARD items that related directly to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 was also calculated. The number of times each article was cited (as indicated by the Web of Science) after publication until March 2016 and the article exposure time (time in months between publication and March 2016) were extracted.

Results

Sixty-three articles were analyzed. The mean (range) total and QUADAS-2-related STARD scores were 20.0 (14.5–25) and 11.4 (7–15), respectively. The mean citation number was 4 (0–21). Citation number did not associate significantly with either STARD score after accounting for exposure time (total score: correlation coefficient = 0.154, p = 0.232; QUADAS-2-related score: correlation coefficient = 0.143, p = 0.266).

Conclusion

The degree of adherence to STARD 2015 was moderate for this journal, indicating that there is room for improvement. When adjusted for exposure time, the degree of adherence did not affect the citation rate.

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

The Impact of Different Levels of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D on Image Quality of 320-Row Coronary CT Angiography: A Clinical Trial

Purpose

The aim of this study was the systematic image quality evaluation of coronary CT angiography (CTA), reconstructed with the 3 different levels of adaptive iterative dose reduction (AIDR 3D) and compared to filtered back projection (FBP) with quantum denoising software (QDS).

Methods

Standard-dose CTA raw data of 30 patients with mean radiation dose of 3.2 ± 2.6 mSv were reconstructed using AIDR 3D mild, standard, strong and compared to FBP/QDS. Objective image quality comparison (signal, noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), contour sharpness) was performed using 21 measurement points per patient, including measurements in each coronary artery from proximal to distal.

Results

Objective image quality parameters improved with increasing levels of AIDR 3D. Noise was lowest in AIDR 3D strong (p≤0.001 at 20/21 measurement points; compared with FBP/QDS). Signal and contour sharpness analysis showed no significant difference between the reconstruction algorithms for most measurement points. Best coronary SNR and CNR were achieved with AIDR 3D strong. No loss of SNR or CNR in distal segments was seen with AIDR 3D as compared to FBP.

Conclusions

On standard-dose coronary CTA images, AIDR 3D strong showed higher objective image quality than FBP/QDS without reducing contour sharpness.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00967876

Comprehensive assessment of radiation dose estimates for the CORE320 study

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively study estimated radiation doses for subjects included in the main analysis of the Combined Non-invasive Coronary Angiography and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Using 320 Detector Computed Tomography (CORE320) study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00934037), a clinical trial comparing combined CT angiography (CTA) and perfusion CT with the reference standard catheter angiography plus myocardial perfusion SPECT. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Prospectively acquired data on 381 CORE320 subjects were analyzed in four groups of testing related to radiation exposure. Radiation dose estimates were compared between modalities for combined CTA and perfusion CT with respect to covariates known to influence radiation exposure and for the main clinical outcomes defined by the trial. The final analysis assessed variations in radiation dose with respect to several factors inherent to the trial. RESULTS. The mean radiation dose estimate for the combined CTA and perfusion CT protocol (8.63 mSv) was significantly (p < 0.0001 for both) less than the average dose delivered from SPECT (10.48 mSv) and the average dose from diagnostic catheter angiography (11.63 mSv). There was no significant difference in estimated CTA-perfusion CT radiation dose for subjects who had false-positive or false-negative results in the CORE320 main analyses in a comparison with subjects for whom the CTA-perfusion CT findings were in accordance with the reference standard SPECT plus catheter angiographic findings. CONCLUSION. Radiation dose estimates from CORE320 support clinical implementation of a combined CT protocol for assessing coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion.

Computed tomography angiography and myocardial computed tomography perfusion in patients with coronary stents: prospective intraindividual comparison with conventional coronary angiography

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine whether adding myocardial computed tomography perfusion (CTP) to computed tomography angiography (CTA) improves diagnostic performance for coronary stents.

BACKGROUND

CTA of coronary stents has been limited by nondiagnostic studies caused by metallic stent material and coronary motion.

METHODS

CTA and CTP were performed in 91 consecutive patients with stents before quantitative coronary angiography, the reference standard for obstructive stenosis (≥50%). If a coronary stent or vessel was nondiagnostic on CTA, adenosine stress CTP in the corresponding myocardial territory was read for combined CTA/CTP.

RESULTS

Patients had an average of 2.5 ± 1.8 coronary stents (1 to 10), with a diameter of 3.0 ± 0.5 mm. Significantly more patients were nondiagnostic for stent assessment by CTA (22%; mainly due to metal artifacts [75%] or motion [25%]) versus CTP (1%; p < 0.001; severe angina precluded CTP in 1 case). The per-patient diagnostic accuracy of CTA/CTP for stents (87%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 78% to 93%) was significantly higher than that of CTA alone (71%, 95% CI: 61% to 80%; p < 0.001), mainly because nondiagnostic examinations were significantly reduced (p < 0.001). In the analysis of any coronary artery disease, diagnostic accuracy and nondiagnostic rate were also significantly improved by the addition of CTP (p < 0.001). CTA/CTP (7.9 ± 2.8 mSv) had a significantly lower effective radiation dose than angiography (9.5 ± 5.1 mSv; p = 0.005). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for CTA/CTP (0.82, 95% CI: 0.69 to 0.95) was superior to that for CTA (0.69, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.82; p < 0.001) in identifying patients requiring stent revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined coronary CTA and myocardial CTP improves diagnosis of CAD and in-stent restenosis in patients with stents compared with CTA alone. (Coronary Artery Stent Evaluation With 320-Slice Computed Tomography-The CArS 320 Study [CARS-320]; NCT00967876).