Key result
Electrocardiogram-gated thoracic computed tomography angiography without heart rate control facilitated the identification of significant coronary stenosis in ischemic stroke patients, though with a lower per-segment diagnostic accuracy than dedicated coronary CTA (AUC 0.79 vs. 0.87, p < 0.001).
Why the study?
Does ECG-gated TCTA without heart rate control provide comparable diagnostic accuracy to CCTA for detecting significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with acute ischemic stroke?
Observational (n=296)
Blinded to clinical data and reference standard
No
Does ECG-gated TCTA without heart rate control provide comparable diagnostic accuracy to CCTA for detecting significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with acute ischemic stroke?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.79% vs 0.87%
p-value: p=<0.001
ECG-gated TCTA without heart rate control provides acceptable diagnostic accuracy for detecting significant coronary artery stenosis in acute ischemic stroke patients, facilitating comprehensive cardioembolic and coronary assessment in a single scan.
May facilitate combined coronary assessment during stroke CTA; leaves open whether accuracy suffices without dedicated CCTA.
Objective: To compare the diagnostic performance of electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated thoracic computed tomography angiography (TCTA) without heart rate (HR) control in ischemic stroke patients with coronary CTA (CCTA) in non-stroke patients for detection of significant coronary artery stenosis. Materials and Methods: From September 2009 through August 2014, we retrospectively enrolled 138 consecutive patients diagnosed with acute ischemic stroke who had undergone ECG-gated TCTA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA). Over the same period, we selected 167 non-stroke patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease who had undergone CCTA and CCA. With CCA as the reference standard, the diagnostic performance of TCTA and CCTA for identification of significant coronary stenosis (diameter reduction 50%) was calculated. Results: There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between TCTA (n = 132) and CCTA (n = 164), except for the higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation in the stroke group. There was significant difference (p < 0.001) between TCTA and CCTA in average HR (68 12 vs. 61 10 beats per minute) and image quality score (1.3 0.6 vs. 1.2 0.6). Significant coronary stenosis was identified in 101 (77%) patients, 179 (45%) vessels, and 293 (15%) segments of stroke patients, and in 136 (83%) patients, 259 (53%) vessels, and 404 (16%) segments of non-stroke patients. Diagnostic performance on a pervessel and per-patient basis was similar in both TCTA and CCTA groups. There was only significant difference in area under receiver-operating characteristic curve between TCTA and CCTA groups (0.79 vs. 0.87, p < 0.001) on per-segment basis. Conclusion: Electrocardiogram-gated TCTA without HR control facilitates the identification of significant coronary stenosis in patients with ischemic stroke.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Song et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Acute ischemic stroke (n=296). Electrocardiogram-gated thoracic computed tomography angiography (TCTA) without heart rate control vs. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) with heart rate control was evaluated on Area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) for detection of significant coronary stenosis on a per-segment basis (p=<0.001). Electrocardiogram-gated thoracic computed tomography angiography without heart rate control facilitated the identification of significant coronary stenosis in ischemic stroke patients, though with a lower per-segment diagnostic accuracy than dedicated coronary CTA (AUC 0.79 vs. 0.87, p < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: