Evaluation of appropriateness of second-generation 320-row computed tomography for coronary artery disease
Authors:
- Daisuke UtsunomiyaDUDaisuke Utsunomiya
- Seitaro OdaSOSeitaro Oda
- Hideaki YukiHYHideaki Yuki
- Megumi YamamuroMYMegumi Yamamuro
- Kenichi TsujitaKTKenichi Tsujita
- Yoshinori FunamaYFYoshinori Funama
- Morikatsu YoshidaMYMorikatsu Yoshida
- Masafumi KidohMKMasafumi Kidoh
- Hisao OgawaHOHisao Ogawa
- Yasuyuki YamashitaYYYasuyuki Yamashita
Open Access
- 5 March 2015
- journal article
- Published by Springer Nature in SpringerPlus
- Vol. 4 (1) , 109
Abstract
The influence of newer-generation CT on the clinical indications and appropriateness of cardiac CT has not been adequately surveyed. We aimed to evaluate the distribution of appropriateness ratings and test the outcomes of cardiac CT using second-generation 320-row CT. The 2010 appropriate use criteria (AUC) were applied at the point of service to a consecutive series of patients (N = 309) who were referred for cardiac CT. The CT indication was determined based on interviews and medical records. The proportions of patients within the categories of appropriate (A), uncertain (U), inappropriate (I), and not covered were described. The prevalence of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) was also compared among the categories. The proportions were 49.2%, 25.9%, and 20.7% for appropriate, uncertain, and inappropriate indication, respectively. The indication that was not covered was only 4.2%. Significant CAD was more frequently observed for uncertain- than appropriate indication (42.5% vs 27.6%; P = 0.03), although the number of significant stenosed segments was not different (P = 0.13). The recent advancement of cardiac CT increased the proportion of uncertain scans, which were associated with a high prevalence of significant CAD.Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Automated attenuation-based selection of tube voltage and tube current for coronary CT angiography: Reduction of radiation exposure versus a BMI-based strategy with an expert investigatorJournal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, 2013
- Comparison of the Applicability of the 2006 and the 2010 Cardiac CT Angiography Appropriate Use CriteriaJournal of the American College of Radiology, 2013
- Submillisievert Median Radiation Dose for Coronary Angiography with a Second-Generation 320–Detector Row CT Scanner in 107 Consecutive PatientsRadiology, 2013
- Silent Coronary Artery Disease in Japanese Patients Undergoing Carotid Artery StentingJournal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 2013
- ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Acute Nonspecific Chest Pain—Low Probability of Coronary Artery DiseaseJournal of the American College of Radiology, 2012
- Comparisons of Image Quality and Radiation Dose Between Iterative Reconstruction and Filtered Back Projection Reconstruction Algorithms in 256-MDCT Coronary AngiographyAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2012
- Comparison of Radiation Dose and Image Quality: 320-MDCT Versus 64-MDCT Coronary AngiographyAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2011
- Radiation dose of cardiac computed tomography – what has been achieved and what needs to be doneEuropean Radiology, 2010
- Estimated Radiation Dose Associated With Cardiac CT AngiographyJAMA, 2009
- ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 Appropriateness Criteria for Cardiac Computed Tomography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging⁎⁎Developed in accordance with the principles and methodology outlined by ACCF: Patel MR, Spertus JA, Brindis RG, Hendel RC, Douglas PS, Peterson ED, Wolk MJ, Allen JM, Raskin IE. ACCF proposed method for evaluating the appropriateness of cardiovascular imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1606–13.JACC, 2006