TY - JOUR
T1 - Myocardial CT perfusion imaging and SPECT for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease
T2 - A head-to-head comparison from the CORE320 multicenter diagnostic performance study
AU - George, Richard T.
AU - Mehra, Vishal C.
AU - Chen, Marcus Y.
AU - Kitagawa, Kakuya
AU - Arbab-Zadeh, Armin
AU - Miller, Julie M.
AU - Matheson, Matthew B.
AU - Vavere, Andrea L.
AU - Kofoed, Klaus F.
AU - Rochitte, Carlos E.
AU - Dewey, Marc
AU - Yaw, Tan S.
AU - Niinuma, Hiroyuki
AU - Brenner, Winfried
AU - Cox, Christopher
AU - Clouse, Melvin E.
AU - Lima, João A.C.
AU - Di Carli, Marcelo
PY - 2014/8
Y1 - 2014/8
N2 - Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of myocardial computed tomographic (CT) perfusion imaging and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) perfusion imaging in the diagnosis of anatomically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) as depicted at invasive coronary angiography. Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the institutional review board. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Sixteen centers enrolled 381 patients from November 2009 to July 2011. Patients underwent rest and adenosine stress CT perfusion imaging and rest and either exercise or pharmacologic stress SPECT before and within 60 days of coronary angiography. Images from CT perfusion imaging, SPECT, and coronary angiography were interpreted at blinded, independent core laboratories. The primary diagnostic parameter was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated with use of prespecified cutoffs. The reference standard was a stenosis of at least 50% at coronary angiography as determined with quantitative methods. Results: CAD was diagnosed in 229 of the 381 patients (60%). The per-patient sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of CAD (stenosis ≥50%) were 88% (202 of 229 patients) and 55% (83 of 152 patients), respectively, for CT perfusion imaging and 62% (143 of 229 patients) and 67% (102 of 152 patients) for SPECT, with Az values of 0.78 (95% confidence interval: 0.74, 0.82) and 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.64, 0.74) (P = .001). The sensitivity of CT perfusion imaging for single- and multivessel CAD was higher than that of SPECT, with sensitivities for left main, three-vessel, two-vessel, and one-vessel disease of 92%, 92%, 89%, and 83%, respectively, for CT perfusion imaging and 75%, 79%, 68%, and 41%, respectively, for SPECT. Conclusion: The overall performance of myocardial CT perfusion imaging in the diagnosis of anatomic CAD (stenosis ≥50%), as demonstrated with the Az, was higher than that of SPECT and was driven in part by the higher sensitivity for left main and multivessel disease.
AB - Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of myocardial computed tomographic (CT) perfusion imaging and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) perfusion imaging in the diagnosis of anatomically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) as depicted at invasive coronary angiography. Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the institutional review board. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Sixteen centers enrolled 381 patients from November 2009 to July 2011. Patients underwent rest and adenosine stress CT perfusion imaging and rest and either exercise or pharmacologic stress SPECT before and within 60 days of coronary angiography. Images from CT perfusion imaging, SPECT, and coronary angiography were interpreted at blinded, independent core laboratories. The primary diagnostic parameter was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated with use of prespecified cutoffs. The reference standard was a stenosis of at least 50% at coronary angiography as determined with quantitative methods. Results: CAD was diagnosed in 229 of the 381 patients (60%). The per-patient sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of CAD (stenosis ≥50%) were 88% (202 of 229 patients) and 55% (83 of 152 patients), respectively, for CT perfusion imaging and 62% (143 of 229 patients) and 67% (102 of 152 patients) for SPECT, with Az values of 0.78 (95% confidence interval: 0.74, 0.82) and 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.64, 0.74) (P = .001). The sensitivity of CT perfusion imaging for single- and multivessel CAD was higher than that of SPECT, with sensitivities for left main, three-vessel, two-vessel, and one-vessel disease of 92%, 92%, 89%, and 83%, respectively, for CT perfusion imaging and 75%, 79%, 68%, and 41%, respectively, for SPECT. Conclusion: The overall performance of myocardial CT perfusion imaging in the diagnosis of anatomic CAD (stenosis ≥50%), as demonstrated with the Az, was higher than that of SPECT and was driven in part by the higher sensitivity for left main and multivessel disease.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904994736&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84904994736&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1148/radiol.14140806
DO - 10.1148/radiol.14140806
M3 - Article
C2 - 24865312
AN - SCOPUS:84904994736
SN - 0033-8419
VL - 272
SP - 407
EP - 416
JO - RADIOLOGY
JF - RADIOLOGY
IS - 2
ER -