Standardized measurement of coronary inflammation using cardiovascular computed tomography: integration in clinical care as a prognostic medical device.

AIMS: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is a first-line modality in the investigation of suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Mapping of perivascular fat attenuation index (FAI) on routine CCTA enables the non-invasive detection of coronary artery inflammation by quantifying spatial changes in perivascular fat composition. We now report the performance of a new medical device, CaRi-Heart®, which integrates standardized FAI mapping together with clinical risk factors and plaque metrics to provide individualized cardiovascular risk prediction. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study included 3912 consecutive patients undergoing CCTA as part of clinical care in the USA (n = 2040) and Europe (n = 1872). These cohorts were used to generate age-specific nomograms and percentile curves as reference maps for the standardized interpretation of FAI. The first output of CaRi-Heart® is the FAI-Score of each coronary artery, which provides a measure of coronary inflammation adjusted for technical, biological, and anatomical characteristics. FAI-Score is then incorporated into a risk prediction algorithm together with clinical risk factors and CCTA-derived coronary plaque metrics to generate the CaRi-Heart® Risk that predicts the likelihood of a fatal cardiac event at 8 years. CaRi-Heart® Risk was trained in the US population and its performance was validated externally in the European population. It improved risk discrimination over a clinical risk factor-based model [Δ(C-statistic) of 0.085, P = 0.01 in the US Cohort and 0.149, P < 0.001 in the European cohort] and had a consistent net clinical benefit on decision curve analysis above a baseline traditional risk factor-based model across the spectrum of cardiac risk. CONCLUSION: Mapping of perivascular FAI on CCTA enables the non-invasive detection of coronary artery inflammation by quantifying spatial changes in perivascular fat composition. We now report the performance of a new medical device, CaRi-Heart®, which allows standardized measurement of coronary inflammation by calculating the FAI-Score of each coronary artery. The CaRi-Heart® device provides a reliable prediction of the patient's absolute risk for a fatal cardiac event by incorporating traditional cardiovascular risk factors along with comprehensive CCTA coronary plaque and perivascular adipose tissue phenotyping. This integration advances the prognostic utility of CCTA for individual patients and paves the way for its use as a dual diagnostic and prognostic tool among patients referred for CCTA.

Appropriate utilization of cardiac computed tomography for the assessment of stable coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) have been developed in response to growth in cardiac imaging utilization and concern regarding associated costs. Cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has emerged as an important modality in the evaluation of coronary artery disease, however its appropriate utilization in actual practice is uncertain. Our objective was to determine the appropriate utilization of CCTA in a large quaternary care institution and to compare appropriate utilization pre and post publication of the 2013 AUC guidelines. We hypothesized that the proportion of appropriate CCTA utilization will be similar to those of other comparable cardiac imaging modalities and that there would be a significant increase in appropriate use post AUC publication. METHODS: We employed a retrospective cohort study design of 2577 consecutive patients undergoing CCTA between January 1, 2012 and December 30, 2016. An appropriateness category was assigned for each CCTA. Appropriateness classifications were compared pre- and post- AUC publication via the chi-square test. RESULTS: Overall, 83.5% of CCTAs were deemed to be appropriate based on the AUC. Before the AUC publication, 75.0% of CCTAs were classified as appropriate whereas after the AUC publication, 88.0% were classified as appropriate (p < 0.001). The increase in appropriate utilization, when extrapolated to the Medicare population of the United States, was associated with potential cost savings of approximately $57 million per year. CONCLUSIONS: We report a high rate of appropriate use of CCTA and a significant increase in the proportion of CCTAs classified as appropriate after the AUC publication.

Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography / North American Society of Cardiovascular Imaging - Expert Consensus Document on Coronary CT Imaging of Atherosclerotic Plaque.

Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) provides a wealth of clinically meaningful information beyond anatomic stenosis alone, including the presence or absence of nonobstructive atherosclerosis and high-risk plaque features as precursors for incident coronary events. There is, however, no uniform agreement on how to identify and quantify these features or their use in evidence-based clinical decision-making. This statement from the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography and North American Society of Cardiovascular Imaging addresses this gap and provides a comprehensive review of the available evidence on imaging of coronary atherosclerosis. In this statement, we provide standardized definitions for high-risk plaque (HRP) features and distill the evidence on the effectiveness of risk stratification into usable practice points. This statement outlines how this information should be communicated to referring physicians and patients by identifying critical elements to include in a structured CCTA report - the presence and severity of atherosclerotic plaque (descriptive statements, CAD-RADS™ categories), the segment involvement score, HRP features (e.g., low attenuation plaque, positive remodeling), and the coronary artery calcium score (when performed). Rigorous documentation of atherosclerosis on CCTA provides a vital opportunity to make recommendations for preventive care and to initiate and guide an effective care strategy for at-risk patients.

Screening of Potential Cardiac Involvement in Competitive Athletes Recovering From COVID-19: An Expert Consensus Statement.

As our understanding of the complications of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) evolve, subclinical cardiac pathology such as myocarditis, pericarditis, and right ventricular dysfunction in the absence of significant clinical symptoms represents a concern. The potential implications of these findings in athletes are significant given the concern that exercise, during the acute phase of viral myocarditis, may exacerbate myocardial injury and precipitate malignant ventricular arrhythmias. Such concerns have led to the development and publication of expert consensus documents aimed at providing guidance for the evaluation of athletes after contracting COVID-19 in order to permit safe return to play. Cardiac imaging is at the center of these evaluations. This review seeks to evaluate the current evidence regarding COVID-19-associated cardiovascular disease and how multimodality imaging may be useful in the screening and clinical evaluation of athletes with suspected cardiovascular complications of infection. Guidance is provided with diagnostic "red flags" that raise the suspicion of pathology. Specific emphasis is placed on the unique challenges posed in distinguishing athletic cardiac remodeling from subclinical cardiac disease. The strengths and limitations of different imaging modalities are discussed and an approach to return to play decision making for athletes post-COVID-19, as informed by multimodality imaging, is provided.

Coronary artery calcium testing in low-intermediate risk symptomatic patients with suspected coronary artery disease: An effective gatekeeper to further testing?

Computed tomography for quantification of coronary artery calcium (CAC) is a simple non-invasive tool to assess atherosclerotic plaque burden. CAC is highly correlated with coronary atherosclerosis and is a robust predictor of cardiovascular outcomes. Recently, the 2018 ACC/AHA Cholesterol Guidelines endorsed the use of CAC scores in asymptomatic, intermediate risk individuals where the decision to initiate stain therapy is uncertain. However, whether quantification of CAC may play a role in the assessment of symptomatic individuals remains a matter of debate. In this review, we examine the evidence for the use of CAC in low-intermediate risk patients with chest pain. This appraisal places a particular focus on the growing body of literature supporting the negative predictive value of a CAC score of zero to rule out significant coronary artery disease in those without high-risk features. We also evaluate current guidelines, limitations, and future research directions for CAC scoring in this important subgroup of patients.

Temporal Trends in X-Ray Exposure during Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention exposes patient and staff to ionizing radiation. Although staff only receive a small fraction of patient dose through scatter radiation, there are concerns about the potential health effects of repeated exposure. Minimizing both patient and occupational exposure is needed. OBJECTIVE: This article investigates patient and operator X-ray exposure over time in coronary intervention in relation to upgraded X-ray equipment, improved shielding, and enhanced operator awareness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data regarding irradiation time, patient dose, and patient characteristics were extracted from the Norwegian Registry for Invasive Cardiology (NORIC) for procedures performed from 2013 to mid-2019. Personal operator dosimetry records were provided by the Norwegian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority. Improved operator shielding and awareness measures were introduced in 2018. RESULTS: In the period 2013 through June 2019, 21499 procedures were recorded in our institution. Mean dose area product (DAP) for coronary angiography decreased 37% from 2981 µGy·m2 in 2013 to 1891 µGy·m2 in 2019 (p < 0.001). For coronary intervention, DAP decreased 39% from 8358 µGy·m2 to 5055 µGy·m2. Personal dosimetry data indicate a 70% reduction in operator dose per procedure in 2019 compared to 2013. The most pronounced reduction occurred after improved radiation protection measures were implemented in 2018 (-48%). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a temporal trend towards considerable reduction in X-ray doses received by the patient and operator during cardiac catheterization. Upgraded X-ray equipment, improved shielding, and enhanced operator awareness are likely contributors to this development.

The impact of a dedicated coronavirus disease 2019 primary angioplasty protocol on time components related to ST­segment elevation myocardial infarction management in a 24/7 primary percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospital.

BACKGROUND: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) as the treatment of choice for ST­segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) should be rapidly performed. It is necessary to use preventive strategies during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID­19) outbreak, which is an ongoing global concern. However, critical times in STEMI management may be influenced by the implementation of infection control protocols. AIMS: We aimed to investigate the impact of our dedicated COVID­19 PPCI protocol on time components related to STEMI care and catheterization laboratory personnel safety. A subendpoint analysis to compare patient outcomes at a median time of 70 days during the pandemic with those of patients treated in the preceding year was another objective of our study. METHODS: Patients with STEMI who underwent PPCI were included in this study. Chest computed tomography (CT) and real­time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT­PCR) tests were performed in patients suspected of having COVID­19. A total of 178 patients admitted between February 29 and April 30, 2020 were compared with 146 patients admitted between March 1 and April 30, 2019. RESULTS: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection was confirmed by rRT­PCR in 7 cases. In 6 out of 7 patients, CT was indicative of COVID­19. There were no differences between the study groups regarding critical time intervals for reperfusion in STEMI. The 70­day mortality rate before and during the pandemic was 2.73% and 4.49%, respectively (P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the dedicated COVID­19 PPCI protocol in patients with STEMI allowed us to achieve similar target times for reperfusion, short­term clinical outcomes, and staff safety as in the prepandemic era.

Stent evaluation by coronary computed tomography angiography: a comparison between Iopamidol-370 and Ioversol-320 hypo-osmolar iodine concentration contrasts.

OBJECTIVE: Qualitative and quantitative image analysis between Iopamidol-370 and Ioversol-320 in stents´ evaluation by coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA). METHODS: Sixty-five patients with low-risk stable angina undergoing stent follow-up with coronary CTA were assigned to Iopamidol I-370 (n = 33) or Ioversol I-320 (n = 32) in this prospective, double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized trial. Stent lumen image quality was graded by 5-point Likert Scale. Lumen mean attenuation was measured at native coronary segments: pre-stent, post-stent, distal segments and at coronary plaques. Lumen attenuation increase (LAI) ratio was calculated for all stents. Heart rate (HR) variation, premature heart beats (PHB), heat sensation (HS), blooming and beam hardening were also assessed. RESULTS: Image quality was similar between groups, with no significant difference (Likert score 4.48 ± 0.75 vs 4.54 ± 0.65, p = 0.5). There were similarities in LAI ratio between I-370 and I-320 (0.39 ± 0.42 vs 0.48 ± 0.44 HU, p = 0.08). Regarding lumen mean attenuation at native coronary segments, a significant difference was observed, with I-320 presenting lower values, including contrast mean attenuation in distal segments. After statistical multivariate analysis, three variables correlated with stent image quality: 1) stent diameter, 2) HR variation and 3) stent lumen LAI ratio. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between Iopamidol-370 mgI ml-1 and Ioversol-320 mgI ml-1 contrasts regarding overall stent lumen image quality, which was mainly influenced by stent diameter, HR and LAI ratio.Advances in knowledge:Coronary CTA allows adequate stents' visualization and image quality is influenced by stent diameter, HR variation and LAI ratio.Stents' image quality showed no difference between different concentration contrasts (I-370 vs. I-320); however, higher concentration contrasts may provide an improved overall visualization, especially regarding coronary distal segments.

Cardiac computed tomography angiography in the paediatric population: Expert consensus from the Filiale de cardiologie pédiatrique et congénitale (FCPC) and the Société française d'imagerie cardiaque et vasculaire diagnostique et interventionnelle (SFICV).

This paper aims to provide a paediatric cardiac computed tomography angiography expert panel consensus based on the opinions of experts from the Société française d'imagerie cardiaque et vasculaire diagnostique et interventionnelle (SFICV) and the Filiale de cardiologie pédiatrique congénitale (FCPC). This expert panel consensus includes recommendations for indications, patient preparation, computed tomography angiography radiation dose reduction techniques and postprocessing techniques. We think that to realize its full potential and to avoid pitfalls, cardiac computed tomography angiography in children with congenital heart disease requires training and experience. Moreover, paediatric cardiac computed tomography angiography protocols should be standardized to acquire optimal images in this population with the lowest radiation dose possible, to prevent unnecessary radiation exposure. We also provide a suggested structured report and a list of acquisition protocols and technical parameters in relation to specific vendors.

How to guide PCI?: A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Traditional coronary angiography (CA) as a main technique has been used to determine the coronary artery anatomy and guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We mainly focused on whether the new techniques could improve the patients' mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), and myocardial infarction. METHODS: For the network meta-analysis, we searched the trials of different PCI guidances from MEDLINE, Current Contents Connect, Google Scholar, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The last search date was December 10, 2018. RESULTS: The analyses of all results found that there was no significant difference in mortality among the groups. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) analysis showed that intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided PCI was significantly superior to CA, fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave-free ratio, optical coherence tomography. However, CA, fractional flow reserve, instantaneous wave-free ratio, and optical coherence tomography showed no difference in reducing mortality. The analyses of all results found that there was no significant difference in the incidence of MACEs among the groups. RCTs analysis showed that IVUS-guided PCI was significantly superior to CA, but there was no significant difference among the other groups. The analyses of all results or RCTs showed that there was no significant difference in myocardial infarction incidence among the groups. CONCLUSION: IVUS-guided PCI is an effective method to decrease all-cause death MACEs.

Comparison of NICE and ESC proposed strategies on new onset chest pain and the contemporary clinical utility of pretest probability risk score.

AIMS: Patients with de novo chest pain are usually investigated non-invasively. The new UK-National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommend CT coronary angiography (CTCA) for all patients, while European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends functional tests. We sought to compare the clinical utility and perform a cost analysis of these recommendations in two UK centres with different primary investigative strategies. METHODSRESULTS: We compared two groups of patients, group A (n=667) and group B (n=654), with new onset chest pain in two neighbouring National Health Service hospitals, each primarily following either ESC (group A) or NICE (group B) guidance. We assessed the clinical utility of each strategy, including progression to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and revascularisation. We present a retrospective cost analysis in the context of UK tariff for stress echo (£176), CTCA (£220) and ICA (£1001). Finally, we sought to identify predictors of revascularisation in the whole population.Baseline characteristics in both groups were similar. The progression to ICA was comparable (9.9% vs 12.0%, p=0.377), with similar requirement for revascularisation (4.0% vs 5.0%.; p=0.532). The average cost of investigations per investigated patient was lower in group A (£279.66 vs £325.77), saving £46.11 per patient. The ESC recommended risk score (RS) was found to be the only predictor of revascularisation (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Both NICE and ESC-proposed strategies led to similar rates of ICA and need for revascularisation in discrete, but similar groups of patients. The SE-first approach had a lower overall cost by £46.11 per patient, and the ESC RS was the only variable correlated to revascularisation.

CAD-RADS: Pushing the Limits.

Coronary CT angiography is now established as the first-line diagnostic imaging test to exclude coronary artery disease (CAD) in the population at low to intermediate risk. Wide variability exists in both the reporting of coronary CT angiography and the interpretation of these reports by referring physicians. The CAD Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) is sponsored by multiple societies and is a collaborative effort to provide standard classification of CAD, which is then integrated into patient clinical care. The main goals of the CAD-RADS are to decrease variability among readers; enhance communication between interpreting and referring clinicians, allowing collaborative determination of the best course of patient care; and generate consistent data for auditing, data mining, quality improvement, research, and education. There are several scenarios in which the CAD-RADS guidelines are ambiguous or do not provide definite recommendations for further management of CAD. The authors discuss the CAD-RADS categories and modifiers, highlight a variety of complex or ambiguous scenarios, and provide recommendations for managing these scenarios. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ©RSNA, 2020 See discussion on this article by Aviram and Wolak.

Comparison of professional medical society guidelines for appropriate use of coronary computed tomography angiography.

BACKGROUND: Multiple appropriate use criteria (AUC) exist for the evaluation of coronary artery disease (CAD), but there is little data on the agreement between AUC from different professional medical societies. The aim of this study is to compare the appropriateness of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) exams assessed using multimodality AUC from the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) versus the American College of Radiology (ACR). METHODS: In a single-center prospective cohort study from June 2014 to 2016, 1005 consecutive subjects referred for evaluation of known or suspected CAD received a contrast-enhanced CCTA. The primary outcome was the agreement of appropriateness ratings using ACCF and ACR guidelines, measured by the kappa statistic. A secondary outcome was the rate of obstructive CAD by appropriateness rating. RESULTS: Among 1005 subjects, the median (5-95th percentile) age was 59 (37-76) years with 59.0% male. The ACCF criteria classified 39.6% (n = 398) appropriate, 24.2% (n = 243) maybe appropriate, and 36.2% (n = 364) rarely appropriate. The ACR guidelines classified 72.3% (n = 727) appropriate, 2.6% (n = 26) maybe appropriate, and 25.1% (n = 252) rarely appropriate. ACCF and ACR appropriateness ratings were in agreement for 55.0% (n = 553). Overall, there was poor agreement (kappa 0.27 [95% confidence interval 0.23-0.31]). By both AUC methods, a low rate of obstructive CAD was observed in the rarely appropriate exams (ACCF 7.1% [n = 26 of 364] and ACR 13.5% [n = 34 of 252]). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to ACCF criteria, the ACR guidelines of appropriateness were broader and classified significantly more CCTA exams as appropriate. The poor agreement between appropriateness ratings from the ACCF and ACR AUC guidelines evokes implications for reimbursement and future test utilization.