Dataset related to the article: "CT Perfusion Versus Coronary CT Angiography in Patients With Suspected In-Stent Restenosis or CAD Progression"
- Andreini Daniele1
- Mushtaq Saima1
- Pontone Gianluca1
- Conte Edoardo1
- Collet Carlos2
- Sonck Jeroen2
- D'errico Andrea3
- Di Odoardo Luca3
- Guglielmo Marco1
- Baggiano Andrea1
- Trabattoni Daniela1
- Ravagnani paolo1
- Montorsi Piero1
- Teruzzi Giovanni1
- Olivares paolo1
- Fabiocchi Franco3
- De martini Stefano1
- Calligaris Giuseppe1
- Annoni Andrea1
- mancini elisabetta1
- Formenti alberto1
- Magatellii Marco4
- Lombardi Federico5
- Consiglio Elisa1
- Muscogiuri Giuseppe1
- Fiorentini Cesare1
- Bartorelli Antonio1
- Pepi Mauro1
- 1. Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS
- 2. Cardiovascular Center Aalst, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium;
- 3. Department of Cardiology, Fondazione Ospedale Policlinico, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- 4. University Of Brescia, Italy
- 5. bDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Cardiovascular Section, University of Milan, Milan, Italy;
Description
This record contains raw data related to the article "CT Perfusion Versus Coronary CT
Angiography in Patients With Suspected
In-Stent Restenosis or CAD Progression"
OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomography
angiography (CTA) alone, adenosine-stress myocardial perfusion assessed by computed tomography (CTP) alone, and
coronary CTA þ CTP by using a 16-cm Z-axis coverage scanner versus invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and fractional
flow reserve (FFR) as the clinical standard.
BACKGROUND Diagnostic performance of coronary CTA for in-stent restenosis detection is still challenging. Recently,
CTP showed additional diagnostic power over coronary CTA in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. However,
few data are available on CTP performance in patients with previous stent implantation.
METHODS Consecutive stable patients with previous coronary stenting referred for ICA were enrolled. All patients
underwent stress myocardial CTP and rest CTP þ coronary CTA. Invasive FFR was performed during ICA when clinically
indicated. The diagnostic rate and diagnostic accuracy of coronary CTA, CTP, and coronary CTA þ CTP were evaluated in
stent-, territory-, and patient-based analyses.
RESULTS In the 150 enrolled patients (132 men; mean age 65.1 9.1 years), the CTP diagnostic rate was significantly
higher than that of coronary CTA in all analyses (territory based [96.7% vs. 91.1%; p < 0.0001] and patient based [96%
vs. 68%; p < 0.0001]). When ICA was used as gold standard, CTP diagnostic accuracy was significantly higher than that
of coronary CTA in all analyses (territory based [92.1% vs. 85.5%, p < 0.03] and patient based [86.7% vs. 76.7%,
p < 0.03]). The concordant coronary CTA þ CTP assessment exhibited the highest diagnostic accuracy values versus ICA
(95.8%in the territory-based analysis). The diagnostic accuracy of CTP was significantly higher than that of coronary CTA
(75% vs. 30.5%; p < 0.001). The radiation exposure of coronary CTA þ CTP was 4.15 1.5 mSv.
CONCLUSIONS In patients with coronary stents, CTP significantly improved the diagnostic rate and accuracy of coronary
CTA alone compared with both ICA and invasive FFR as gold standard.
Files
Additional details
Related works
- Is supplement to
- Journal article: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2019.05.031. [ (DOI)