TY - JOUR
T1 - Coronary computed tomography angiography for the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy
T2 - A meta-analysis of prospective trials
AU - Wever-Pinzon, Omar
AU - Romero, Jorge
AU - Kelesidis, Iosif
AU - Wever-Pinzon, James
AU - Manrique, Carlos
AU - Budge, Deborah
AU - Drakos, Stavros G.
AU - Piña, Ileana L.
AU - Kfoury, Abdallah G.
AU - Garcia, Mario J.
AU - Stehlik, Josef
PY - 2014/5/20
Y1 - 2014/5/20
N2 - Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for detecting cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) in comparison with conventional coronary angiography (CCAG) alone or with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). Background CAV limits long-term survival after heart transplantation, and screening for CAV is performed on annual basis. CCTA is currently not recommended for CAV screening due to the limited accuracy reported by early studies. Technological advances, however, might have resulted in improved test performance and might justify re-evaluation of this recommendation. Methods A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase for all prospective trials assessing CAV using CCTA was performed using a standard approach for meta-analysis for diagnostic test and a bivariate analysis. Results Thirteen studies evaluating 615 patients (mean age 52 years, 83% male) and 9,481 segments fulfilled inclusion criteria. Patient-based analyses comparing CCTA versus CCAG for the detection of any CAV (> luminal irregularities) and significant CAV (stenosis ≥50%), showed mean weighted sensitivities of 97% and 94%, specificities of 81% and 92%, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97% and 99%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 78% and 67%, and diagnostic accuracies of 88% and 94%, respectively. There was a strong trend toward improved sensitivity (97% vs. 91%, p = 0.06) and NPV (99% vs. 97%, p = 0.06) to detect significant CAV with 64-slice compared with 16-slice CCTA. A patient-based analysis of 64-slice CCTA versus IVUS showed a mean weighted sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 75% to detect CAV (intimal thickening >0.5 mm), whereas the PPV and NPV were 93% and 50%, respectively. Conclusions CCTA using currently available technology is a reliable noninvasive imaging alternative to coronary angiography with an excellent sensitivity, specificity, and NPV for the detection of CAV.
AB - Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for detecting cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) in comparison with conventional coronary angiography (CCAG) alone or with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). Background CAV limits long-term survival after heart transplantation, and screening for CAV is performed on annual basis. CCTA is currently not recommended for CAV screening due to the limited accuracy reported by early studies. Technological advances, however, might have resulted in improved test performance and might justify re-evaluation of this recommendation. Methods A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase for all prospective trials assessing CAV using CCTA was performed using a standard approach for meta-analysis for diagnostic test and a bivariate analysis. Results Thirteen studies evaluating 615 patients (mean age 52 years, 83% male) and 9,481 segments fulfilled inclusion criteria. Patient-based analyses comparing CCTA versus CCAG for the detection of any CAV (> luminal irregularities) and significant CAV (stenosis ≥50%), showed mean weighted sensitivities of 97% and 94%, specificities of 81% and 92%, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97% and 99%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 78% and 67%, and diagnostic accuracies of 88% and 94%, respectively. There was a strong trend toward improved sensitivity (97% vs. 91%, p = 0.06) and NPV (99% vs. 97%, p = 0.06) to detect significant CAV with 64-slice compared with 16-slice CCTA. A patient-based analysis of 64-slice CCTA versus IVUS showed a mean weighted sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 75% to detect CAV (intimal thickening >0.5 mm), whereas the PPV and NPV were 93% and 50%, respectively. Conclusions CCTA using currently available technology is a reliable noninvasive imaging alternative to coronary angiography with an excellent sensitivity, specificity, and NPV for the detection of CAV.
KW - accuracy
KW - cardiac allograft vasculopathy
KW - coronary computed tomography angiography
KW - heart transplantation
KW - transplant vasculopathy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84900528818&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84900528818&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.071
DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.071
M3 - Article
C2 - 24681149
AN - SCOPUS:84900528818
SN - 0735-1097
VL - 63
SP - 1992
EP - 2004
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
IS - 19
ER -