51. Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Computed Tomography Perfusion, and Computed Tomography-Fractional Flow Reserve in Functional Myocardial Ischemia Assessment Versus Invasive Fractional Flow Reserve
- Author
-
Jorge A. Gonzalez, Christopher M. Kramer, Lucia Flors, Peter W. Shaw, Michael Salerno, and Michael J. Lipinski
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,viruses ,Myocardial Ischemia ,Fractional flow reserve ,Coronary Angiography ,Sensitivity and Specificity ,Severity of Illness Index ,Article ,Coronary artery disease ,Radionuclide angiography ,Iodinated contrast ,Predictive Value of Tests ,medicine ,Humans ,Radionuclide Angiography ,Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon ,Evidence-Based Medicine ,medicine.diagnostic_test ,business.industry ,Coronary Stenosis ,Odds ratio ,medicine.disease ,Prognosis ,Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial ,Stenosis ,Predictive value of tests ,Tomography ,Radiology ,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ,business ,Nuclear medicine ,Tomography, X-Ray Computed - Abstract
We sought to compare the diagnostic performance of computed coronary tomography angiography (CCTA), computed tomography perfusion (CTP) and computed tomography fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) for assessing the functional significance of coronary stenosis as defined by invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR), in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. CCTA has proven clinically useful for excluding obstructive CAD due to its high sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV), however the ability of CTA to identify functionally significant CAD has remained challenging. We searched PubMed/Medline for studies evaluating CCTA, CTP or CT-FFR for the non-invasive detection of obstructive CAD as compared to catheter-derived FFR as the reference standard. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, likelihood ratios (LR), odds ratio (OR) of all diagnostic tests were assessed. Eighteen studies involving a total of 1535 patients were included. CTA demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.92, specificity 0.43, PPV of 0.56 and NPV of 0.87 on a per-patient level. CT-FFR and CTP increased the specificity to 0.72 and 0.77 respectively (P=0.004 and P=0.0009)) resulting in higher point estimates for PPV 0.70 and 0.83 respectively. There was no improvement in the sensitivity. The CTP protocol involved more radiation (3.5 mSv CCTA VS 9.6 mSv CTP) and a higher volume of iodinated contrast (145 mL). In conclusion, CTP and CT-FFR improve the specificity of CCTA for detecting functionally significant stenosis as defined by invasive FFR on a per-patient level; both techniques could advance the ability to non-invasively detect the functional significance of coronary lesions.
- Published
- 2015