Search

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate interobserver reproducibility between cardiothoracic radiologists applying the Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) to describe atherosclerotic burden on coronary computed tomography angiography., Methods: Forty clinical computed tomography angiography cases were retrospectively and independently evaluated by 3 attending and 2 fellowship-trained cardiothoracic radiologists using the CAD-RADS lexicon. Radiologists were blinded to patient history and underwent initial training using a practice set of 10 subjects. Interobserver reproducibility was assessed using an intraclass correlation (ICC) on the basis of single-observer scores, absolute agreement, and a 2-way random-effects model. Nondiagnostic studies were excluded. ICC was also performed for CAD-RADS scores grouped by management recommendations for absent (0), nonobstructive (1 to 2), and potentially obstructive (3 to 5) CAD., Results: Interobserver reproducibility was moderate to good (ICC: 0.748, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.639-0.842, P<0.0001), with higher agreement among cardiothoracic radiology fellows (ICC: 0.853, 95% CI: 0.730-0.922, P<0.0001) than attending radiologists (ICC: 0.711, 95% CI: 0.568-0.824, P<0.0001). Interobserver reproducibility for clinical management categories was marginally decreased (ICC: 0.692, 95% CI: 0.570-0.802, P<0.0001). The average percent agreement between pairs of radiologists was 84.74%. Percent observer agreement was significantly reduced in the presence (M=62.22%, SD=15.17%) versus the absence (M=80.91%, SD=17.97%) of modifiers, t(37.95)=3.566, P=0.001., Conclusions: Interobserver reliability and agreement with the CAD-RADS terminology are moderate to good in clinical practice. However, further investigations are needed to characterize the causes of interobserver disagreement that may lead to differences in management recommendations., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: A few case reports of intracavitary coronary arteries (ICCA) have been reported and only a single case series on the coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) prevalence rate of ICCA of the right coronary artery (RCA). We describe several cases of ICCA that were noted incidentally and also determine the overall prevalence rate of anomalous ICCA., Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of ICCA was performed consisting of consecutive CCTA cases as well as a group of ICCA from teaching files. To establish a prevalence rate, we reviewed 464 consecutive CCTA referred to our center for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The presence of ICCA and several imaging features were evaluated., Results: Our cohort comprises a total of 12 patients with ICCA, with 1 patient containing 2 anomalous ICCA. 83.3% of affected patients were adult males, with an average age of 69.8 years. The RCA was the most commonly affected vessel (53.8%). The mean length of the intracavitary segment was 33.4 mm for the RCA and 27 mm for the LAD. No cases involved the left circumflex coronary artery. Six of the cases were identified routinely as part of clinical practice and therefore not included in the prevalence analysis. On review of our transcatheter aortic valve replacement database, there was a 1.3% prevalence rate of ICCA. RCA had a prevalence of 0.4%, whereas LAD had a prevalence of 0.9%., Conclusions: Although rare, our study suggests that ICCA may be more common than previously described. Its presence is important to communicate to clinicians prior to invasive cardiac procedures to prevent potentially catastrophic outcomes.