Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Jan;194(1):85-92. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.2652.

Assessment of in-stent restenosis using 64-MDCT: analysis of the CORE-64 Multicenter International Trial.

Author information

  • 1Department of Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Evaluations of stents by MDCT from studies performed at single centers have yielded variable results with a high proportion of unassessable stents. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of 64-MDCT angiography (MDCTA) in identifying in-stent restenosis in a multicenter trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

The Coronary Evaluation Using Multidetector Spiral Computed Tomography Angiography Using 64 Detectors (CORE-64) Multicenter Trial and Registry evaluated the accuracy of 64-MDCTA in assessing 405 patients referred for coronary angiography. A total of 75 stents in 52 patients were assessed: 48 of 75 stents (64%) in 36 of 52 patients (69%) could be evaluated. The prevalence of in-stent restenosis by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in this subgroup was 23% (17/75). Eighty percent of the stents were <or=3.0 mm in diameter.

RESULTS:

The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value to detect 50% in-stent stenosis visually using MDCT compared with QCA was 33.3%, 91.7%, 57.1%, and 80.5%, respectively, with an overall accuracy of 77.1% for the 48 assessable stents. The ability to evaluate stents on MDCTA varied by stent type: Thick-strut stents such as Bx Velocity were assessable in 50% of the cases; Cypher, 62.5% of the cases; and thinner-strut stents such as Taxus, 75% of the cases. We performed quantitative assessment of in-stent contrast attenuation in Hounsfield units and correlated that value with the quantitative percentage of stenosis by QCA. The correlation coefficient between the average attenuation decrease and >or=50% stenosis by QCA was 0.25 (p=0.073). Quantitative assessment failed to improve the accuracy of MDCT over qualitative assessment.

CONCLUSION:

The results of our study showed that 64-MDCT has poor ability to detect in-stent restenosis in small-diameter stents. Evaluability and negative predictive value were better in large-diameter stents. Thus, 64-MDCT may be appropriate for stent assessment in only selected patients.

PMID:
20028909
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PMCID:
PMC3294284
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Icon for Atypon Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk