Search

Background There is a paucity of data concerning the optimal ventilator management in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia; particularly, the optimal levels of positive-end expiratory pressure (PEEP) are unknown. We aimed to investigate the effects of two levels of PEEP on alveolar recruitment in critically ill patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods A single-center cohort study was conducted in a 39-bed intensive care unit at a university-affiliated hospital in Genoa, Italy. Chest computed tomography (CT) was performed to quantify aeration at 8 and 16 cmH2O PEEP. The primary endpoint was the amount of alveolar recruitment, defined as the change in the non-aerated compartment at the two PEEP levels on CT scan. Results Forty-two patients were included in this analysis. Alveolar recruitment was median [interquartile range] 2.7 [0.7–4.5] % of lung weight and was not associated with excess lung weight, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, respiratory system compliance, inflammatory and thrombophilia markers. Patients in the upper quartile of recruitment (recruiters), compared to non-recruiters, had comparable clinical characteristics, lung weight and gas volume. Alveolar recruitment was not different in patients with lower versus higher respiratory system compliance. In a subgroup of 20 patients with available gas exchange data, increasing PEEP decreased respiratory system compliance (median difference, MD − 9 ml/cmH2O, 95% CI from − 12 to − 6 ml/cmH2O, p p = 0.003), increased PaO2 with FiO2 = 0.5 (MD 24 mmHg, 95% CI from 12 to 51 mmHg, p 2 with FiO2 = 1.0 (MD 7 mmHg, 95% CI from − 12 to 49 mmHg, p = 0.313). Moreover, alveolar recruitment was not correlated with improvement of oxygenation or venous admixture. Conclusions In patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, higher PEEP resulted in limited alveolar recruitment. These findings suggest limiting PEEP strictly to the values necessary to maintain oxygenation, thus avoiding the use of higher PEEP levels.

PURPOSE: This study compared the role of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography (MSCT-CA) and stress electrocardiography (ECG) in the diagnostic workup of patients with chronic chest pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MSCT-CA was performed in 43 patients (31 men, 12 women, mean age 58.8+/-7.7 years) with stable angina after a routine diagnostic workup involving stress ECG and conventional CA. The following inclusion criteria were adopted: sinus rhythm and ability to hold breath for 12 s. Beta-blockers were administered in patients with heart rate>or=70 beats/minute. In order to identify or exclude patients with significant stenoses (>or=50% lumen), we determined posttest likelihood ratios of stress test and MSCT-CA separately and of MSCT-CA performed after the stress test. RESULTS: The pretest probability of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) was 74%. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 2.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-5.3] and 0.3 (95% CI: 0.2-0.7) for the stress test and 10.0 (95% CI: 1.8-78.4) and 0.0 (95% CI: 0.0-infinity) for MSCT-CA, respectively. MSCT-CA increased the posttest probability of significant CAD after a negative stress test from 50% to 86% and after a positive stress test from 88% to 100%. MSCT-CA correctly detected all patients without CAD. CONCLUSIONS: Noninvasive MSCT-CA is a potentially useful tool in the diagnostic workup of patients with stable angina owing to its capability to detect or exclude significant CAD.

In the past 20 years, Cardiac Computed Tomography (CCT) has become a pivotal technique for the noninvasive diagnostic work-up of coronary and cardiac diseases. Continuous technical and methodological improvements, combined with fast growing scientific evidence, have progressively expanded the clinical role of CCT. Recent large multicenter randomized clinical trials documented the high prognostic value of CCT and its capability to increase the cost-effectiveness of the management of patients with suspected CAD. In the meantime, CCT, initially perceived as a simple non-invasive technique for studying coronary anatomy, has transformed into a multiparametric “one-stop-shop” approach able to investigate the heart in a comprehensive way, including functional, structural and pathophysiological biomarkers. In this complex and revolutionary scenario, it is urgently needed to provide an updated guide for the appropriate use of CCT in different clinical settings. This manuscript, endorsed by the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM) and by the Italian Society of Cardiology (SIC), represents the first of two consensus documents collecting the expert opinion of Radiologists and Cardiologists about current appropriate use of CCT.

Introduction: The introduction of Cardiac Computed Tomography (CCT) has changed the paradigm in the field of diagnostic cardiovascular medicine. CCT is the primary tool in the assessment of suspected Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) and should be followed by functional assessment when needed to stratify disease and to plan potential interventional or surgical therapy. Areas Covered: We provided the current state of the knowledge on the main aspects of technique of examination, image interpretation and clinical indications. We have focused our attention on the basic routine applications and activities. Expert Opinion: The primary role of CCT in suspected CAD will progressively become the standard approach. In general, any situation in which anatomy of the heart and thoracic vessels/structures is mandatory must be approached using CT first, whenever possible. The quantity and quality of information that can be provided by CCT is big and the operators should learn how to deal with this information. On the other hand, CCT is only apparently a straightforward and simple examination. It is actually the most complex diagnostic procedure that can be performed on CT and requires highly skilled operators and state-of-art-technology. Abbreviations: CABG = Coronary Artery Bypass GraftCAD = Coronary Artery DiseaseCAG = Conventional Coronary AngiographyCCT = Cardiac Computed TomographyCT = Computed TomographySSCT = Single-Source Computed TomographyDSCT = Dual-Source Computed TomographyOMT = Optimal Medical TherapyPCI = Percutaneous Coronary InterventionNSTEMI = Non-ST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionSTEMI = ST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionSPECT = Single–Photon Emission Computed TomographyPET = Positron Emission TomographyRCT = Randomized Clinical Trialmm = millimeterkV = kiloVoltmAs = milliAmpere/secondFOV = Field of View.

The normal and pathological anatomy of the heart and coronary arteries are nowadays widely developed topics and constitute a fundamental part of the cultural background of the radiologist. The introduction of cardiac ECG-gated synchronized CT scanners with an ever-increasing number of detectors and with increasingly high structural characteristics (increase in temporal resolution, increase in contrast resolution with dual-source, dual energy scanners) allows the virtual measurement of anatomical in vivo structures complying with heart rate with submillimetric precision permitting to clearly depict the normal anatomy and follow the pathologic temporal evolution. Accordingly to these considerations, cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) asserts itself as a gold standard method for the anatomical evaluation of the heart and permits to evaluate, verify, measure and characterize structural pathological alterations of both congenital and acquired degenerative diseases. Accordingly, CCTA is increasingly used as a prognostic model capable of modifying the outcome of diseased patients in planning interventions and in the post-surgical/interventional follow-up. The profound knowledge of cardiac anatomy and function through highly detailed CCTA analysis is required to perform an efficient and optimal use in real-world clinical practice.

In the past decades, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has become a powerful tool in the management of coronary artery disease. The diagnostic and prognostic value of CCTA has been extensively demonstrated in both large observational studies and clinical trials among stable chest pain patients. The quantification of coronary artery calcium score (CACS) is a well-established predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in asymptomatic subjects. Besides CACS, the main strength of CCTA is the accurate assessment of the individual total atherosclerotic plaque burden, which holds important prognostic information. In addition, CCTA, by providing detailed information on coronary plaque morphology and composition with identification of specific high-risk plaque features, may further improve the risk stratification beyond the assessment of coronary stenosis. The development of new CCTA applications, such as stress myocardial CT perfusion and computational fluids dynamic applied to standard CCTA to derive CT-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) values have shown promising results to guide revascularization, potentially improving clinical outcomes in stable chest pain patients. In this review, starting from the role of CACS and moving beyond coronary stenosis, we evaluate the existing evidence of the prognostic effectiveness of the CCTA strategy in real-world clinical practice.

The aim of the study was to compare the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) and computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) for the assessment of non-obstructive/obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in high-risk asymptomatic subjects. Two hundred and thirteen consecutive asymptomatic subjects (113 male; mean age 53.6 +/- 12.4 years) with more than one risk factor and an inconclusive or unfeasible non-invasive stress test result underwent CACS and CTCA in an outpatient setting. All patients underwent conventional coronary angiography (CAG). Data from CACS (threshold for positive image: Agatston score 1/100/1,000) and CTCA were compared with CAG regarding the degree of CAD (non-obstructive/obstructive

Purpose. This study was undertaken to describe the correlation between the distribution of coronary artery disease (CAD) in a symptomatic population with suspected ischaemic heart disease, cardiovascular risk factors (RF) and clinical presentation. Materials and methods. We studied 163 patients (mean age 65.5 years; 101 men and 62 women) referred for multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography (MDCT-CA) to rule out CAD. The patients had no prior history of revascularisation or myocardial infarction. We analysed how the characteristics of CAD (severity and type of plaque) can change with the increase in RF and how they are related to different clinical presentations. Results. Patients were divided into three groups according to the number of RF: zero or one, two or three, and four or more. The percentage of coronary arteries with no plaque, nonsignificant disease and significant disease was 55%, 41% and 4%, respectively, in patients with zero or one RF; 27%, 51% and 22%, respectively, in patients with two or three RF; and 19%, 38% and 44%, respectively, in patients with four or more RF. Plaque in patients with nonsignificant disease was mixed in 65%, soft in 18% and calcified in 17%. The percentage of coronaries with no plaque in the three RF groups was 50%, 20% and 0% in patients with typical chest pain and 46%, 24% and 12% in those with atypical pain. The percentage of significant disease in patients with typical pain was 0%, 47% and 86% and in those with atypical pain 4%, 20% and 29%. Conclusions. MDCT plays an important role in the identification of CAD in patients with suspected ischaemic heart disease. Severity and type of disease is highly correlated with RF number and assumes different characteristics according to clinical presentation.

PURPOSE: This study was done to assess the prognostic value of computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) in a large multicentre population of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) and, in particular, its incremental value compared with traditional methods for risk stratification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study that began in January 2003 conducted on patients with suspected CAD assessed with CTCA on the basis of symptoms (chest pain, dyspnoea) and/or abnormal or equivocal stress test and/or a high cardiovascular risk profile. The participating centres will provide data obtained with CTCA performed with 16-slice or higher equipment. Exclusion criteria are renal insufficiency, allergy to iodinated contrast material, pregnancy and previous myocardial infarction or revascularisation (percutaneous coronary intervention and/or coronary artery bypass graft). All patients are stratified by means of clinical assessment and/or data retrieved from a clinical database. Risk factors considered are hypertension, dyslipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, smoking, family history and obesity. Symptoms are classified as absent, typical chest pain, atypical chest pain and dyspnoea. Primary endpoints are death, major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiac death, unstable angina requiring hospitalisation, acute myocardial infarction) and shifting of cardiovascular risk category on the basis of coronary plaque burden. The secondary endpoint is coronary revascularisation. Telephone interviews and/or clinical databases are used for the follow-up. The study will be conducted on a population >1,000 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The information collected from the Prognostic Registry for Coronary Artery Disease (PRORECAD) will provide insight into the prognostic value of CTCA in addition to demographic and clinical features. The results will allow for better use and interpretation of CTCA for prognostic purposes.

Our aim was to determine the prognostic value of computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA), coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS) and Morise clinical score in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). A total of 722 patients (480 men; 62.7 +/- 10.9 years) who were referred for further cardiac evaluation underwent CACS and contrast-enhanced CTCA to evaluate the presence and severity of CAD. Of these, 511 (71%) patients were without previous history of CAD. Patients were stratified according to the Morise clinical score (low, intermediate, high), to CACS (0-10, 11-100, 101-400, 401-1,000, > 1,000) and to CTCA (absence of CAD, nonsignificant CAD, obstructive CAD). Patients were followed up for the occurrence of major events: cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina and revascularisation. Significant CAD (> 50% luminal narrowing) was detected in 260 (36%) patients; nonsignificant CAD (< 50% luminal narrowing) in 250 (35%) and absence of CAD in 212 (29%). During a mean follow-up of 20 +/- 4 months, 116 events (21 hard) occurred. In patients with normal coronary arteries on CTCA, the major event rate was 0% vs. 1.7% in patients with nonsignificant CAD and 7.3% in patients with significant CAD (p < 0.0001). Three hard events (14%) occurred in patients with CACSa parts per thousand currency sign100 and two (9.5%) in patients with intermediate Morise score; one revascularisation was observed in a patient with low Morise score. At multivariate analysis, diabetes, obstructive CAD and CACS > 1,000 were significant predictors of events (p < 0.05). An excellent prognosis was noted in patients with a normal CTCA (0% event rate). CACS a parts per thousand currency sign100 and low-intermediate Morise score did not exclude the possibility of events at follow-up.

In 10 years, computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) has shifted from an investigational tool to clinical reality. Even though CT technologies are very advanced and widely available, a large body of evidence supporting the clinical role of CTCA is missing. The reason is that the speed of technological development has outpaced the ability of the scientific community to demonstrate the clinical utility of the technique. In addition, with each new CT generation, there is a further broadening of actual and potential applications. In this review we examine the state of the art on CTCA. In particular, we focus on issues concerning technological development, radiation dose, implementation, training and organisation.

Purpose To determine the relationship between established cardiovascular risk factors, clinical presentation and the extent of coronary artery disease (CAD), as described with computed tomography coronary angiography. Material and methods In this cross-sectional study, we included 567 symptomatic individuals without a history of CAD who consecutively underwent 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography for evaluation of suspected CAD. We analyzed the prevalence of CAD depending on sex, age, symptoms and risk factors. Results A total of 8542 segments were analyzed. No evidence of CAD was observed in 225 patients (40%), nonsignificant CAD in 221 patients (39%) and significant CAD (luminal narrowing >50%) in the remaining 121 patients (21%). CAD increased with advancing age, significantly above 50 years (P

PURPOSE: This study compared two quantitative semiautomated software packages for volumetric analysis of the left ventricle (LV) by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging using two-dimensional (2D) cine balanced steady-state free precession (b-SSFP) sequences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 46 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac MR imaging for various indications. Two-dimensional cine b-SSFP sequences were used to assess the LV. Data sets were evaluated with two dedicated software packages: ViewForum, version 4.2, and Argus, version Va60C. Results were compared with Student's t test for paired samples, Pearson's r correlation coefficient and R2 coefficient of determination; ejection fraction differences were assessed with Bland-Altman analysis. The time required for analysis was also recorded. RESULTS: We observed very high levels of concordance and reproducibility. High correlation was observed for ejection fraction (p>0.05; r=0.9; R (2)=0.82). The time required for analysis was 7.6+/-2.78 min vs. 7.52+/-2.4 min (p>0.05; r=0.85; R (2)=0.73). Intraobserver and interobserver variability did not show significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: LV volume evaluation is an integral part of cardiac MR imaging. In our experience, there is no significant difference between the commonly used software packages in either quantitative output or time required for analysis.