Cited 35 times since 2010 (2.5 per year) source: EuropePMC Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Volume 17, Issue 3, 9 2 2010, Pages 470-478 Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography for the detection of in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis. Carrabba N, Schuijf JD, de Graaf FR, Parodi G, Maffei E, Valenti R, Palumbo A, Weustink AC, Mollet NR, Accetta G, Cademartiri F, Antoniucci D, Bax JJ

Background

We sought to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multi-detector row computed tomography (MDCT) compared with invasive coronary angiography for in-stent restenosis (ISR) detection.

Methods

MEDLINE, Cochrane library, and BioMed Central database searches were performed until April 2009 for original articles. Inclusion criteria were (1) 64-MDCT was used as a diagnostic test for ISR, with >50% diameter stenosis selected as the cut-off criterion for significant ISR, using invasive coronary angiography and quantitative coronary angiography as the standard of reference; (2) absolute numbers of true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative results could be derived. Standard meta-analytic methods were applied.

Results

Nine studies with a total of 598 patients with 978 stents included were considered eligible. On average, 9% of stents were unassessable (range 0-42%). Accuracy tests with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing 64-MDCT vs invasive coronary angiography showed that pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (random effect model) values were: 86% (95% CI 80-91%), 93% (95% CI 91-95%), 12.32 (95% CI 7.26-20.92), 0.18 (95% CI 0.12-0.28) for binary ISR detection. The symmetric area under the curve value was 0.94, indicating good agreement between 64-MDCT and invasive coronary angiography.

Conclusions

64-MDCT has a good diagnostic accuracy for ISR detection with a particularly high negative predictive value. However, still a relatively large proportion of stents remains uninterpretable. Accordingly, only in selected patients, 64-MDCT may serve as a potential alternative noninvasive method to rule out ISR.

J Nucl Cardiol. 2010 4;17(3):470-478