Plaque quantification by coronary computed tomography angiography using intravascular ultrasound as a reference standard: a comparison between standard and last generation computed tomography scanners

Published: 13-09-2019| Version 1 | DOI: 10.17632/chvs8xhr2j.1
Contributors:
Edoardo Conte,
Saima Mushtaq,
Gianluca Pontone,
paolo ravagnani,
Stefano Galli,
Marco Guglielmo,
Andrea Baggiano,
Daniela Trabattoni,
ANDREA ANNONI,
Maria Elisabetta Mancini,
Alberto Formenti,
Giuseppe Muscogiuri,
Cesare Fiorentini,
Antonio Bartorelli,
Mauro Pepi,
Daniele Andreini

Description

Aims The emerging role of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) as a non-invasive tool for atherosclerosis evaluation is supported by data reporting a good correlation between CCTA and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) for plaque volume quantification. Aim of the present study was to evaluate whether a last generation CT scanner may improve coronary plaque volume assessment using IVUS as standard-of-reference. Methods and results From a registry of 1915 consecutive, all-comers, patients who underwent a clinically indicated IVUS evaluation we enrolled 59 patients who underwent CCTA with a 64-slice CT (Group 1) and 59 patients who underwent CCTA with whole-heart coverage CT scanner (Group 2). Patients who underwent CCTA with unfavourable heart rhythm were not excluded from the analysis. Image quality (4-point Likert scale) focused on plaque analysis was evaluated. Plaque volume quantification by CCTA was compared to IVUS. No difference in clinical characteristics was found between Group 1 and Group 2. Plaque volume quantification by CCTA was considered not feasible in 11 plaques of Group 1 and in 4 plaques of Group 2 (P = 0.09). Higher correlation for plaque volume quantification by CCTA vs. IVUS was demonstrated in Group 2 when compared with Group 1 (r = 0.9888 vs. 0.9499; P < 0.0001). The Bland–Altman analysis showed plaque volume overestimation by CCTA of 11.9 mm3 in Group 1 and 4 mm2 in Group 2 (P < 0.001). Effective radiation dose of CCTA was significantly lower in Group 2 vs. Group 1 (2.7 ± 0.9 vs. 8.1 ± 3.6 mSv, respectively; P < 0.001). ................................................................................................................................................................................................... Conclusions CCTA using a new scanner generation showed to be an accurate non-invasive tool to assess and quantify coronaryplaque volume.

Files