Search

Background: Affective temperaments are documented predictors of psychopathology, but cumulating data suggest their relationship with coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to evaluate their role in relation to surrogate semiquantitative markers of coronary plaque burden, as assessed by coronary CT angiography (CCTA)., Methods: We included 351 patients who were referred for CCTA due to suspected CAD. All patients completed the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris and San Diego Autoquestionnaire (TEMPS-A). The severity and extent of CAD was evaluated by CCTA, applying semiquantitative plaque burden scores, notably Segment Involvement Score (SIS) and Segment Stenosis Score (SSS). Logistic regression analyses were performed to define the predictors of CAD severity and extent., Results: Regarding the scores evaluated by TEMPS-A that consists of 110 questions, in men, significant inverse association was found between hyperthymic temperament score and SSS (β = -0.143, (95%CI: -0.091 to -0.004), p = 0.034). Compared to the TEMPS-A form, applying the abbreviated version - containing 40 questions - significant relationship between affective temperaments and SSS or SIS was found in case of both sexes. Concerning men, hyperthymic temperament was demonstrated to be independent predictor of both SSS (β = -0.193, (95%CI: -0.224 to -0.048), p = 0.004) and SIS (β = -0.194, (95%CI: -0.202 to -0.038), p = 0.004). Additionally, we proved, that significant positive association between irritable temperament and SSS (β = 0.152, (95%CI: 0.002 to 0.269), p = 0.047) and SIS (β = 0.155, (95%CI: 0.004 to 0.221), p = 0.042) exists among women., Limitations: Cross-sectional analysis of a single center study with self-reported questionnaires., Conclusions: Assessment of affective temperaments could offer added value in stratifying cardiovascular risk for patients beyond traditional risk factors., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Purpose: To assess the impact of different quantum iterative reconstruction (QIR) levels on objective and subjective image quality of ultra-high resolution (UHR) coronary CT angiography (CCTA) images and to determine the effect of strength levels on stenosis quantification using photon-counting detector (PCD)-CT., Method: A dynamic vessel phantom containing two calcified lesions (25 % and 50 % stenosis) was scanned at heart rates of 60, 80 and 100 beats per minute with a PCD-CT system. In vivo CCTA examinations were performed in 102 patients. All scans were acquired in UHR mode (slice thickness0.2 mm) and reconstructed with four different QIR levels (1-4) using a sharp vascular kernel (Bv64). Image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), sharpness, and percent diameter stenosis (PDS) were quantified in the phantom, while noise, SNR, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), sharpness, and subjective quality metrics (noise, sharpness, overall image quality) were assessed in patient scans., Results: Increasing QIR levels resulted in significantly lower objective image noise (in vitro and in vivo: both p < 0.001), higher SNR (both p < 0.001) and CNR (both p < 0.001). Sharpness and PDS values did not differ significantly among QIRs (all pairwise p > 0.008). Subjective noise of in vivo images significantly decreased with increasing QIR levels, resulting in significantly higher image quality scores at increasing QIR levels (all pairwise p < 0.001). Qualitative sharpness, on the other hand, did not differ across different levels of QIR (p = 0.15)., Conclusions: The QIR algorithm may enhance the image quality of CCTA datasets without compromising image sharpness or accurate stenosis measurements, with the most prominent benefits at the highest strength level., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Schoepf receives institutional research support and/or honoraria for speaking and consulting from Bayer, Bracco, Elucid BioImaging, Guerbet, HeartFlow Inc., Keya Medical, and Siemens Healthineers. Dr. Szilveszter and Dr. Maurovich-Horvat receive institutional research and travel support from Siemens Healthineers. Dr. Varga-Szemes receives institutional research and travel support from Siemens Healthineers and is a consultant and shareholder for Elucid Bioimaging. Dr. Emrich is a consultant for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. and receives travel support, speaker fee and institutional research support from Siemens Healthineers., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We aimed to identify the optimal reconstruction settings based on qualitative and quantitative image quality parameters on standard and ultra-high resolution (UHR) images using photon-counting CT (PCCT)., Method: We analysed 45 patients, 29 with standard and 16 with UHR acquisition, applying both smoother and sharper kernel settings. Coronary CT angiography images were performed on a dual-source PCCT system using standard (0.4/0.6 mm slice thickness, Bv40/Bv44 kernels, QIR levels 0-4) or UHR acquisition (0.2/0.4 mm slice thickness, Bv44/Bv56 kernels, QIR levels 0-4). Qualitative image quality was assessed using a 4-point Likert scale. Image noise (SD), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated in both the proximal and distal segments., Results: On standard resolution, larger slice thickness resulted in an average increase of 12.5 % in CNR, whereas sharper kernel led to an average 8.7 % decrease in CNR. Highest CNR was measured on 0.6 mm, Bv40, QIR4 images and lowest on 0.4 mm, Bv44, QIR0 images: 25.8 ± 4.1vs.8.3 ± 1.6 (p < 0.001). On UHR images, highest CNR was observed on 0.4 mm, Bv40, QIR4 and lowest on 0.2 mm, Bv56 and QIR0 images: 21.5 ± 3.9vs.3.6 ± 0.8 (p < 0.001). Highest qualitative image quality was found on images with Bv44 kernel and QIR level 3/4 with both slice thicknesses on standard reconstruction. Additionally, Bv56 with QIR4 on 0.2 mm slice thickness images showed highest subjective image quality. Preserved distal vessel visualization was detected using QIR 2-4, Bv56 and 0.2 mm slice thickness., Conclusions: Photon-counting CT demonstrated high qualitative and quantitative image quality for the assessment of coronaries and stents., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: We sought to compare the degree of maximal stenosis and the rate of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) recommendations in patients who underwent coronary CT angiography (CCTA) with photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT) versus those who underwent CCTA with whole heart coverage energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT)., Methods: In our retrospective single-center study, we included consecutive patients with suspected CAD who underwent CCTA performed with either PCD-CT or a 280-slice EID-CT. The degree of coronary stenosis was classified as no CAD, minimal (1-24 ​%), mild (25-49 ​%), moderate (50-69 ​%), severe stenosis (70-99 ​%), or occlusion., Results: A total of 812 consecutive patients were included in the analysis, 401 patients scanned with EID-CT and 411 patients with PCD-CT (mean age: 58.4 ​± ​12.4 years, 45.4 ​% female). Despite the higher total coronary artery calcium score (CACS) in the PCD-CT group (10 [interquartile range (IQR) ​= ​0-152.8] vs 1 [IQR ​= ​0-94], p ​< ​0.001), obstructive CAD was more frequently reported in the EID-CT vs PCD-CT group (no CAD: 28.7 ​% vs 26.0 ​%, minimal: 23.2 ​% vs 30.9 ​%, mild: 19.7 ​% vs 23.4 ​%, moderate: 14.5 ​% vs 9.7 ​%, severe: 11.5 ​% vs 8.5 ​% and occlusion: 2.5 ​% vs 1.5 ​%, respectively, p ​= ​0.025). EID-CT was independently associated with downstream ICA (OR ​= ​2.76 [95%CI ​= ​1.58-4.97] p ​< ​0.001) in the overall patient population, in patients with CACS<400 (OR ​= ​2.18 [95%CI ​= ​1.13-4.39] p ​= ​0.024) and in patients with CACS≥400 (OR ​= ​3.83 [95%CI ​= ​1.42-11.05] p ​= ​0.010)., Conclusion: In patients who underwent CCTA with PCD-CT the number of subsequent ICAs was lower as compared to patients who were scanned with EID-CT. This difference was greater in patients with extensive coronary calcification., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Filtered back projection (FBP) and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) are ubiquitously applied in the reconstruction of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) datasets. However, currently no data is available on the impact of a model-based adaptive filter (MBAF2), recently developed for a dedicated cardiac scanner., Purpose: Our aim was to determine the effect of MBAF2 on subjective and objective image quality parameters of coronary arteries on CCTA., Methods: Images of 102 consecutive patients referred for CCTA were evaluated. Four reconstructions of coronary images (FBP, ASIR, MBAF2, ASIR + MBAF2) were co-registered and cross-section were assessed for qualitative (graininess, sharpness, overall image quality) and quantitative [image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR)] image quality parameters. Image noise and signal were measured in the aortic root and the left main coronary artery, respectively. Graininess, sharpness, and overall image quality was assessed on a 4-point Likert scale., Results: As compared to FBP, ASIR, and MBAF2, ASIR + MBAF2 resulted in reduced image noise [53.1 ± 12.3, 30.6 ± 8.5, 36.3 ± 4.2, 26.3 ± 4.0 Hounsfield units (HU), respectively; p < 0.001], improved SNR (8.4 ± 2.6, 14.1 ± 3.6, 11.8 ± 2.3, 16.3 ± 3.3 HU, respectively; p < 0.001) and CNR (9.4 ± 2.7, 15.9 ± 4.0, 13.3 ± 2.5, 18.3 ± 3.5 HU, respectively; p < 0.001). No difference in sharpness was observed amongst the reconstructions (p = 0.08). Although ASIR + MBAF2 was non-superior to ASIR regarding overall image quality (p = 0.99), it performed better than FBP (p < 0.001) and MBAF2 (p < 0.001) alone., Conclusion: The combination of ASIR and MBAF2 resulted in reduced image noise and improved SNR and CNR. The implementation of MBAF2 in clinical practice may result in improved noise reduction performance and could potentiate radiation dose reduction., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess whether anthropometrics, clinical risk factors, and coronary artery calcium score (CACS) can predict the need of further testing after coronary CT angiography (CTA) due to non-diagnostic image quality and/or the presence of significant stenosis., Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent coronary CTA due to suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) were included in our retrospective analysis. We used multivariate logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics analysis containing anthropometric factors: body mass index, heart rate, and rhythm irregularity (model 1); and parameters used for pre-test likelihood estimation: age, sex, and type of angina (model 2); and also added total calcium score (model 3) to predict downstream testing., Results: We analyzed 4120 (45.7% female, 57.9 ± 12.1 years) patients. Model 3 significantly outperformed models 1 and 2 (area under the curve, 0.84 [95% CI 0.83-0.86] vs. 0.56 [95% CI 0.54-0.58] and 0.72 [95% CI 0.70-0.74], p < 0.001). For patients with sinus rhythm of 50 bpm, in case of non-specific angina, CACS above 435, 756, and 944; in atypical angina CACS above 381, 702, and 890; and in typical angina CACS above 316, 636, and 824 correspond to 50%, 80%, and 90% probability of further testing, respectively. However, higher heart rates and arrhythmias significantly decrease these cutoffs (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: CACS significantly increases the ability to identify patients in whom deferral from coronary CTA may be advised as CTA does not lead to a final decision regarding CAD management. Our results provide individualized cutoff values for given probabilities of the need of additional testing, which may facilitate personalized decision-making to perform or defer coronary CTA., Key Points: • Anthropometric parameters on their own are insufficient predictors of downstream testing. Adding parameters of the Diamond and Forrester pre-test likelihood test significantly increases the power of prediction. • Total CACS is the most important independent predictor to identify patients in whom coronary CTA may not be recommended as CTA does not lead to a final decision regarding CAD management. • We determined specific CACS cutoff values based on the probability of downstream testing by angina-, arrhythmia-, and heart rate-based groups of patients to help individualize patient management.

Although reaching target heart rate (HR) before coronary CT angiography (CCTA) is still of importance, adequate HR control remains a challenge for many patients. Purpose-built cardiac scanners may provide optimal image quality at higher HRs by further improving temporal resolution. We aimed to compare the amount of motion artifacts on CCTA acquired using a dedicated cardiac CT (DCCT) compared to a conventional multidetector CT (MDCT) scanner. We compared 80 DCCT images to 80 MDCT scans matched by sex, age, HR, and coronary dominance. Image quality was graded on a per-patient, per-vessel and per-segment basis. Motion artifacts were assessed using Likert scores (1: non-diagnostic, 2: severe artifacts, 3: mild artifacts, 4: no artifacts). Patients were stratified into four groups according to HR (<60/min, 60–65/min, 66–70/min and >70/min). Overall, 2328 coronary segments were evaluated. DCCT demonstrated superior overall image quality compared to MDCT (3.7 ± 0.4 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, p < 0.001). DCCT images yielded higher Likert scores in all HR ranges, which was statistically significant in the 60–65/min, 66–70/min and >70/min ranges (3.9 ± 0.2 vs. 3.7 ± 0.2, p = 0.008; 3.5 ± 0.5 vs. 3.1 ± 0.6, p = 0.048 and 3.5 ± 0.4 vs. 2.7 ± 0.7, p < 0.001, respectively). Using a dedicated cardiac scanner results in fewer motion artifacts, which may allow optimal image quality even in cases of high HRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: High-power short-duration ablation has shown impressive efficacy and safety for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI); however, initial efficacy results with very high power short-duration ablation were discouraging. This study compared the long-term durability of PVI performed with a 90- versus 50-W power setting. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo PVI with the QDOT catheter using a power setting of 90 or 50 W. Three months after the index procedure, patients underwent a repeat electrophysiology study to identify pulmonary vein reconnections. Patients were followed for 12 months to detect AF recurrences. RESULTS: We included 46 patients (mean age, 64 years; women, 48%). Procedure (76 versus 84 minutes; P  =0.02), left atrial dwell (63 versus 71 minutes; P  =0.01), and radiofrequency (303 versus 1040 seconds; P  <0.0001) times were shorter with 90- versus 50-W procedures, while the number of radiofrequency applications was higher with 90 versus 50 W (77 versus 67; P  =0.01). There was no difference in first-pass isolation (83% versus 82%; P  =1.0) or acute reconnection (4% versus 14%; P  =0.3) rates between 90 and 50 W. Forty patients underwent a repeat electrophysiology study. Durable PVI on a per PV basis was present in 72/78 (92%) versus 68/77 (88%) PVs in the 90- and 50-W energy setting groups, respectively; effect size: 72/78−68/77=0.040, lower 95% CI=−0.051 (noninferiority limit=−0.1, ie, noninferiority is met). No complications occurred. There was no difference in 12-month atrial fibrillation-free survival between the 90- and 50-W groups (P  =0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Similarly high rates of durable PVI and arrhythmia-free survival were achieved with 90 and 50 W. Procedure, left atrial dwell, and radiofrequency times were shorter with 90 W compared with 50 W. The sample size is too small to conclude the safety and long-term efficacy of the high and very high-power short-duration PVI; further studies are needed to address this topic. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05459831. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]