HealthManagement, Volume 16 - Issue 3, 2016

Clinical Use of Coronary CT Angiography

share Share


During the last decades we have witnessed a tremendous ‏progress in imaging technologies. Probably the ‏most impressive results have been achieved in cardiac ‏imaging. The landscape of diagnostic tools used for cardiovascular ‏diagnostics has dramatically changed. All cardiovascular ‏imaging technologies have improved, but the ‏most spectacular changes have occurred in echocardiography, ‏coronary and cardiac computed tomgraphy (CT) angiography, ‏cardiac magnetic resonance and hybrid modalities ‏(position emission tomography computed tomography ‏[PET -CT] and position emission tomography magnetic resonance ‏imaging [PET -MRI]). These have moved from the area ‏of research tools into routinely used ones.


Several trends in this area are obvious. First of all, progress of ‏cardiac imaging is related to amazing improvements in scanning ‏technology. In some ways cardiac imaging is a kind of ‏‘probing stone’ for scanners. For example, it is quite difficult to ‏show improvements in diagnosis ‏of pulmonary nodules using widedetector ‏or dual-source scanners ‏in comparison with ‘traditional’ ‏low-end 16-row systems (here ‏we are speaking about diagnostic ‏accuracy, not radiation exposure ‏to patients or image quality). In the case of cardiac ‏computed tomography angiography (CTA ), the difference for ‏the better in the case of technically more advanced scanners ‏is quite obvious.


It is interesting to note that the ability to detect and grade ‏coronary stenosis performance of ‘traditional’ 64-row scanners ‏in general is quite similar to newer and more expensive ‏scanners. Latest trials have shown that neither coronary ‏catheterisation nor cardiac CTA are perfect in grading ‏coronary lesions into haemodynamically significant and ‏not significant ones. First of all this fact concerns so called ‏intermediate stenosis, causing luminal narrowing to 50-70 ‏percent. This is why one of the major directions in cardiac ‏radiology is functional imaging. In case of CCTA it can be ‏done with the help of perfusion myocardial CT or noninvasive ‏assessment of coronary blood flow. The last one could ‏be done with help of CT fractional flow reserve (CT FFR) analysis ‏or assessment of transluminal arterial gradient (TGA). ‏Both these approaches (especially CT FFR) are promising ‏tools for studies of coronary flow through stenotic lesions.


New generations of CT scanners can perform both CCTA and ‏myocardial perfusion CT with fewer non-interpretable scans. ‏It is their major advantage over standard 64-row scanners. ‏


In the past results of CCTA in multiple single- and multicentre ‏trials had been compared with invasive coronary angiography ‏(ICA) using the latter as a ‘gold standard’. Quite naturally ‏CCTA was inferior to ICA in grading of coronary lesions. ‏But after accumulation of a wealth of practical and scientific ‏data, today we are witnessing a quite different situation.


In cardiology and cardiac surgery we are witnessing a rapid ‏transition from the ‘traditional’ approach to grading of individual ‏coronary artery lesions towards the ‘modern’ one, which is ‏based on a combination of anatomy and physiology to determine ‏the physiological consequences of coronary stenosis: ‏does it cause myocardial ischaemia or not?


With the introduction and ‏rapid evolution of invasive ‏fractional flow reserve ‏(FFR) technology, a new gold ‏standard has been developed ‏to invasively assess ‏the physiological severity ‏of a coronary artery stenosis. Several trials using FFR have ‏demonstrated that ICA also has limited capabilities to determine ‏the physiologic significance of intermediate (50-70 ‏percent) coronary stenosis. In some recent trials it was shown ‏that in case of head-to-head comparison of ICA with CCTA ‏using FFR as a new reference, the diagnostic performance of ‏both modalities for grading of coronary stenosis was comparable ‏(Budoff et al. 2016).


What is even more important is that CCTA has the ability ‏to see the vessel wall, to assess the structure of atherosclerotic ‏plaques and even to detect (in some cases) the ‏vulnerable plaques. CCTA provides three-dimensional imaging ‏of the whole heart, including the myocardium, all the heart ‏chambers and valves.


So it looks like the answer to the popular question: “When ‏does CCTA replace ICA?” is “Tomorrow!”. Why tomorrow, not ‏today? As has been said earlier, even the best models of ‏modern scanners still cannot provide artefact-free anatomica and physiological imaging in one hundred percent of cases, ‏and most of them are not so common in public healthcare. ‏Usually they are used in medical centres dedicated to cardiac ‏imaging and research.


But having almost 30 years’ experience in cardiac imaging, ‏I am quite enthusiastic about this transition. Let’s look ‏back: a long time ago (in the 1980s) both CT and MRI replaced ‏catheter angiography for diagnostic workup of aortic disease. ‏After the appearance of spiral and multislice CTA this modality ‏practically replaced catheterisation in diagnosis of pulmonary ‏thromboembolism, carotid and peripheral arterial disease. ‏The next target is coronary imaging and we are almost there. ‏Hunting for vulnerable plaques will continue and hybrid cardiac ‏imaging (PET -CT, SPE CT-CT, MRI -CT) is steadily developing ‏from a research tool into a clinical one.


Use of cardiac imaging is rapidly expanding and today we ‏have plenty of scientific data providing us with reasons to ‏use CCTA more widely in clinical routine. It is important to ‏notice that CCTA has proven independent prognostic value ‏and it can even improve patient outcomes (SCOT -Heart Trial) ‏(Williams et al. 2016). Indications for use of CCTA are given ‏in modern U.S. and European cardiological and radiological ‏guidelines (one can refer to publications from the American ‏College of Cardiology (ACC), Society of Cardiovascular Computed ‏Tomography (SCCT), the European Society of Cardiology ‏(ES C) and the American College of Radiology (ACR) - plus the ‏recent iGuide from the European Society of Radiology (ESR). ‏But it looks like even these modern recommendations and ‏guidelines would be substantially changed and updated in ‏favour of CCTA when some recent important trials of 2015- ‏2016 are taken into consideration.


Generally speaking, technical progress of CCTA in combination ‏with rigorous research in this area has resulted in rapid ‏transformed use of this diagnostic modality. Probably in the ‏next few years we will see the situation when imaging of all ‏vessels - big and small - will be done noninvasively with the ‏help of CTA (or MRA) and ICA will move completely into the ‏area of intervention (placement of stents, grafts, artificial ‏valves, occluders etc.). It is going to be a ‘win-win’ situation ‏both for physicians and patients because it will increase the ‏number of right procedures performed rapidly and effectively ‏for the right patients. 


Budoff MJ, Nakazato R, Mancini GB et al. (2016) CT ‏angiography for the prediction of hemodynamic significance ‏in intermediate and severe lesions: head-to-head ‏comparison with quantitative coronary angiography ‏using fractional flow reserve as the reference standard. ‏JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 9(5): 559-64.



Williams MC, Hunter A, Shah AS et al. (2016) Use of ‏coronary computed tomographic angiography to guide ‏management of patients with coronary disease. J Am ‏Coll Cardiol, 67(15): 1759-68.

Related Articles

The time has come The latest in CCTA and how the quality and timeliness of diagnosis can be improved. Since... Read more

Coronary CT angioraphy, CCTA, Valentin Sinitsyn Clinical Use of Coronary CT Angiography

No comment

Please login to leave a comment...

Highlighted Products