Jorge Dahdal, Ruurt A Jukema, Sharon Remmelzwaal, Pieter G Raijmakers, Pim van der Harst, Marco Guglielmo, Maarten J Cramer, Steven A J Chamuleau, Pepijn A van Diemen, Paul Knaapen, Ibrahim Danad
{"title":"Diagnostic performance of CCTA and CTP imaging for clinically suspected in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis.","authors":"Jorge Dahdal, Ruurt A Jukema, Sharon Remmelzwaal, Pieter G Raijmakers, Pim van der Harst, Marco Guglielmo, Maarten J Cramer, Steven A J Chamuleau, Pepijn A van Diemen, Paul Knaapen, Ibrahim Danad","doi":"10.1016/j.jcct.2024.10.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The objective of this study is to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic performance of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA) and a hybrid approach that incorporates Computed Tomography Perfusion (CTP) in addition to CCTA (CCTA + CTP) for the detection of in-stent restenosis (ISR), as defined by angiography.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of articles identified 18,513 studies. After removing duplicates, title/abstract screening, and full-text review, 17 CCTA and 3 CCTA + CTP studies were included. Only studies using ≥64-slices multidetector computed tomography (CT) were considered eligible.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The per-patient ISR prevalence was 43 %, with 92 % of stents fully interpretable with CCTA. Meta-analysis exhibited a per-stent CCTA (n = 2674) sensitivity of 90 % (95 % CI; 84-94 %), specificity of 89 % (95 % CI; 86-92 %), positive likelihood ratio of 7.17 (95 % CI; 5.24-9.61), negative likelihood ratio of 0.17 (95 % CI; 0.10-0.25), and diagnostic odds ratio of 45.7 (95 % CI; 22.71-82.43). Additional sensitivity analyses revealed no influence of stent diameter or strut thickness on the diagnostic yield of CCTA. The per-stent diagnostic performance of CCTA + CTP (n = 752) did not show differences compared to CCTA.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With currently utilized scanners, CCTA and CCTA + CTP demonstrated high diagnostic performance for in-stent restenosis evaluation. Consequently, a history of previous stent implantation should not be an argument to preclude using these methods in clinically suspected patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":94071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2024.10.014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: The objective of this study is to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic performance of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA) and a hybrid approach that incorporates Computed Tomography Perfusion (CTP) in addition to CCTA (CCTA + CTP) for the detection of in-stent restenosis (ISR), as defined by angiography.
Methods: A comprehensive search of articles identified 18,513 studies. After removing duplicates, title/abstract screening, and full-text review, 17 CCTA and 3 CCTA + CTP studies were included. Only studies using ≥64-slices multidetector computed tomography (CT) were considered eligible.
Results: The per-patient ISR prevalence was 43 %, with 92 % of stents fully interpretable with CCTA. Meta-analysis exhibited a per-stent CCTA (n = 2674) sensitivity of 90 % (95 % CI; 84-94 %), specificity of 89 % (95 % CI; 86-92 %), positive likelihood ratio of 7.17 (95 % CI; 5.24-9.61), negative likelihood ratio of 0.17 (95 % CI; 0.10-0.25), and diagnostic odds ratio of 45.7 (95 % CI; 22.71-82.43). Additional sensitivity analyses revealed no influence of stent diameter or strut thickness on the diagnostic yield of CCTA. The per-stent diagnostic performance of CCTA + CTP (n = 752) did not show differences compared to CCTA.
Conclusions: With currently utilized scanners, CCTA and CCTA + CTP demonstrated high diagnostic performance for in-stent restenosis evaluation. Consequently, a history of previous stent implantation should not be an argument to preclude using these methods in clinically suspected patients.