Coronary computed tomography angiography for the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy

A meta-analysis of prospective trials

Omar Wever-Pinzon, Jorge E. Romero, Iosif Kelesidis, James Wever-Pinzon, Carlos R. Manrique, Deborah Budge, Stavros G. Drakos, Ileana L. Pina, Abdallah G. Kfoury, Mario J. Garcia, Josef Stehlik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

35 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2005-2006
Number of pages2
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume63
Issue number19
DOIs
StatePublished - May 20 2014

Fingerprint

Allografts
Meta-Analysis
Coronary Angiography
Computed Tomography Angiography
Tunica Intima
Sensitivity and Specificity
Heart Transplantation
Routine Diagnostic Tests
Pathologic Constriction
Technology
Survival

Keywords

  • accuracy
  • cardiac allograft vasculopathy
  • coronary computed tomography angiography
  • heart transplantation
  • transplant vasculopathy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Coronary computed tomography angiography for the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy : A meta-analysis of prospective trials. / Wever-Pinzon, Omar; Romero, Jorge E.; Kelesidis, Iosif; Wever-Pinzon, James; Manrique, Carlos R.; Budge, Deborah; Drakos, Stavros G.; Pina, Ileana L.; Kfoury, Abdallah G.; Garcia, Mario J.; Stehlik, Josef.

In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 63, No. 19, 20.05.2014, p. 2005-2006.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wever-Pinzon, Omar ; Romero, Jorge E. ; Kelesidis, Iosif ; Wever-Pinzon, James ; Manrique, Carlos R. ; Budge, Deborah ; Drakos, Stavros G. ; Pina, Ileana L. ; Kfoury, Abdallah G. ; Garcia, Mario J. ; Stehlik, Josef. / Coronary computed tomography angiography for the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy : A meta-analysis of prospective trials. In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2014 ; Vol. 63, No. 19. pp. 2005-2006.
@article{8db9ecee02734bb8822d7201beca7f05,
title = "Coronary computed tomography angiography for the detection of cardiac allograft vasculopathy: A meta-analysis of prospective trials",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "accuracy, cardiac allograft vasculopathy, coronary computed tomography angiography, heart transplantation, transplant vasculopathy",
author = "Omar Wever-Pinzon and Romero, {Jorge E.} and Iosif Kelesidis and James Wever-Pinzon and Manrique, {Carlos R.} and Deborah Budge and Drakos, {Stavros G.} and Pina, {Ileana L.} and Kfoury, {Abdallah G.} and Garcia, {Mario J.} and Josef Stehlik",
year = "2014",
month = "5",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.071",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "63",
pages = "2005--2006",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Cardiology",
issn = "0735-1097",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "19",

}

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 E.

AU - Kelesidis, Iosif

AU - Wever-Pinzon, James

AU - Manrique, Carlos R.

AU - Budge, Deborah

AU - Drakos, Stavros G.

AU - Pina, 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

VL - 63

SP - 2005

EP - 2006

JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

SN - 0735-1097

IS - 19

ER -