Cardiac CT for Acute Chest Pain

Radiology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prashant Nagpal ◽  
David A. Bluemke
2009 ◽  
Vol 193 (2) ◽  
pp. 397-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gorka Bastarrika ◽  
Christian Thilo ◽  
Gary F. Headden ◽  
Peter L. Zwerner ◽  
Philip Costello ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 851-860 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Bamberg ◽  
Thomas Mayrhofer ◽  
Maros Ferencik ◽  
Daniel O. Bittner ◽  
Travis R. Hallett ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 40 (11) ◽  
pp. 543 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seung Min Yoo ◽  
Ji Young Rho ◽  
Hwa Yeon Lee ◽  
In Sup Song ◽  
Jae Youn Moon ◽  
...  

Circulation ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 116 (suppl_16) ◽  
Author(s):  
Udo Hoffmann ◽  
Fabian Bamberg ◽  
Sujith Seneviratne ◽  
Ian S Rogers ◽  
Quynh A Truong ◽  
...  

Objective : To determine CT angiographic patterns of coronary plaque and stenosis and diagnostic test characteristics of these findings to predict ACS in patients presenting with acute chest pain to the emergency department (ED). Methods : We conducted a blinded, prospective, observational cohort study in patients presenting with acute chest pain to the ED between May 2005 and July 2006, who were admitted to the hospital to rule out acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with no ischemic ECG changes and negative initial biomarkers. Contrast-enhanced 64-slice cardiac CT was performed immediately before admission and caregivers were blinded to the cardiac CT results. An expert panel determined the presence or absence of ACS (unstable angina pectoris [UAP], Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction [MI] according to AHA/ACC criteria). Two independent observers evaluated cardiac CT data sets for the presence of (1) coronary atherosclerotic plaque, and (2) significant coronary artery stenosis (>50%). Results: Of 221 consecutive patients (44% female, mean age 55±12 years), 31 patients had ACS (10 NSTEMI, 21 UAP). The presence of any coronary atherosclerotic plaque could be excluded in 82 patients (37%). None of these subjects was determined to have ACS (Sensitivity and NPV: 100%, (95% CI: 0.91–1.00 and 0.96–1.00; respectively). The presence of a significant coronary artery stenosis could be excluded in 152 subjects (69%). Overall, three of these patients had ACS during the index hospitalization (NPV, 98 %; 95% CI: 0.94–1.00). In 69 patients (31%), a significant stenosis was either detected or could not be completely excluded. Among them were 28/31 patients with ACS (specificity: 78%, 95% CI: 0.72– 0.84; PPV: 41% 95% CI: 0.29 – 0.53). Conclusions : These data extend initial observations that nearly 40% and 70% of patients with acute chest pain demonstrate no detectable CAD or no significant coronary artery stenosis on cardiac MDCT, respectively. Randomized diagnostic trials are warranted to determine how this information will be used by ED physicians and whether it will decrease the number of unnecessary admissions.


Circulation ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 118 (suppl_18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian S Rogers ◽  
Jamaluddin Moloo ◽  
Claudia U Chae ◽  
Ron Blankstein ◽  
Fabian Bamberg ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: Over 5 million individuals present to EDs with acute chest pain each year, many of which are hospitalized for serial EKGs and cardiac enzymes followed by stress SPECT imaging. A potential alternative to SPECT is cardiac CT, which provides for the immediate and direct evaluation of coronary artery patency. We sought to determine the concordance between these modalities and the ability of CT to exclude ischemia in patients presenting with acute chest pain. METHODS: We enrolled 368 subjects without a history of hemodynamically significant CAD who presented to the ED with acute chest pain yet had negative initial EKGs and cardiac enzymes. All subjects underwent 64-slice cardiac CTA, the results of which were blinded to caregivers, then were admitted for standard care including diagnostic testing, as deemed clinically warranted by the caregivers. CTA exams were scored as being diagnostically positive or negative for significant stenosis (>50% luminal narrowing) or as non-diagnostic. SPECT exams were scored as diagnostically pos or neg for ischemia or scar or as non-diagnostic (e.g., secondary to submaximal workload or artifact). RESULTS: 151 of the 368 subjects (54±11 yrs, 56% men) had an exercise (n=109), adenosine (n=41), or dobutamine (n=1) SPECT exam as part of their clinical care. 115 (76%) of the SPECT exams were read as diagnostic (7 pos for ischemia, 2 pos for scar, and 106 neg), while 36 (24%) were non-diagnostic. In contrast, 135 of the 151 (89%) of the CT exams were read as diagnostic (17 pos, 118 neg), while only 16 (11%) were non-diagnostic (p <0.001). Among the 105 patients that had both diagnostic CT and SPECT exams, there was agreement between the modalities in 97/105 (92%) of patients. With SPECT defined as the standard for detecting ischemia, absence of significant stenosis on a diagnostic CT had a 98% NPV for excluding ischemia. CONCLUSION: Cardiac CT appears to be as feasible as SPECT imaging in patients with acute chest pain but inconclusive initial ED evaluation and may have a lower rate of non-diagnostic exams. Consistent with the known high NPV of CCT, absence of significant stenosis on cardiac CT predicted the absence of SPECT based ischemia in 98% of subjects. Thus, cardiac CT may be sufficient to exclude ischemia in patients with acute chest pain.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document