Subtraction coronary CT angiography in patients with high heart rate

All the previous subtraction coronary CT angiography (CCTA) had strict heart rate (HR) inclusion criteria. In this study, a new subtraction method was applied to patients with various HR. The post-contrast scan time was respectively 3.5 s after ascending aorta peak enhancement while HR >80 bpm, 4 s while 65≤ HR ≤80 bpm and 4.5 s while HR <65 bpm. Forty-six patients who underwent the new subtraction protocol were enrolled and patients were stratified into the high HR group (≥70 bpm) and low HR group (<70 bpm). Eighteen patients with 15 severe calcification segments and 25 stent segments further received invasive coronary angiography (ICA). In all included patients, the coronary artery enhancement was compared between the high and low HR groups. In patients with ICA performed, the image quality improvement and diagnostic effectiveness for detection of significant coronary segments stenosis (>50%) were compared between the conventional CCTA and subtraction CCTA and between the high HR group and low HR group, respectively. All enrolled patients got sufficient coronary artery enhancement. In patients with ICA performed, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the area under the curve (AUC) for the diagnosis of significant stenosis was 0.93 in subtraction CCTA and 0.73 in conventional CCTA (p < 0.05). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in image quality improvement, specificity, positive predictive value and accuracy between the high HR group and low HR group. The new subtraction CCTA method broadened the clinical availability for patients with high HR.

Old and New NICE Guidelines for the Evaluation of New Onset Stable Chest Pain: A Real World Perspective

Stable chest pain is a common clinical presentation that often requires further investigation using noninvasive or invasive testing, resulting in a resource-consuming problem worldwide. At onset of 2016, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published an update on its guideline on chest pain. Three key changes to the 2010 version were provided by the new NICE guideline. First, the new guideline recommends that the previously proposed pretest probability risk score should no longer be used. Second, they also recommend that a calcium score of zero should no longer be used to rule out coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with low pretest probability. Third, the new guideline recommends that all patients with new onset chest pain should be investigated with a coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) as a first-line investigation. However, in real world the impact of implementation of CTA for the evaluation of new onset chest pain remains to be evaluated, especially regarding its cost effectiveness. The aim of the present report was to discuss the results of the studies supporting new NICE guideline and its comparison with European and US guidelines.

Image Quality, Overall Evaluability, and Effective Radiation Dose of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography With Prospective Electrocardiographic Triggering Plus Intracycle Motion Correction Algorithm in Patients With a Heart Rate Over 65 Beats Per Minute

PURPOSE

Recently, a new intracycle motion correction algorithm (MCA) was introduced to reduce motion artifacts from heart rate (HR) in coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA). The aim of the study was to evaluate the image quality, overall evaluability, and effective radiation dose (ED) of cCTA with prospective electrocardiographic (ECG) triggering plus MCA as compared with standard protocol with retrospective ECG triggering in patients with HR≥65 bpm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred consecutive patients (67±10 y) scheduled for cCTA with 65<HR<80 bpm were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were assigned to 2 groups undergoing prospective (group 1) or retrospective (group 2) triggered cCTA. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee and a written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Image noise, signal to noise ratio, contrast to noise ratio, Likert image quality score (score 1, nondiagnostic; score 2, adequate; score 3, good; score 4, excellent), overall image evaluability, and ED were measured and compared between the 2 groups. Both vessel-based and patient-based analyses were evaluated. Student test or Wilcoxon test were used to evaluate differences of continuous variables, whereas the χ test was used to study differences with regard to categorical data. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

cCTA was successfully performed in all patients. In a segment-based model, group 1 compared with group 2 showed a lower rate of overall artifacts (67% vs. 83%; P<0.001) and motion artifacts (49% vs. 66%; P<0.001), resulting in a better Likert image quality score (2.83±1.03 vs. 2.37±1.02; P<0.01) and overall evaluability (85% vs. 75%; P<0.01). Group 1 showed a lower ED as compared with group 2 (3.1±1.9 vs. 11.9±3.3 mSv; P<0.01).

CONCLUSION

MCA and cCTA with prospective ECG-triggering acquisition in patients with high HR improves image quality and overall evaluability compared with cCTA with standard retrospective ECG triggering.