Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024
Diagnostic utility of coronary artery calcium score percentiles and categories to exclude abnormal scans and relevant ischemia in rubidium positron emission tomography.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Frey Simon M, Huré Gabrielle, Leibfarth Jan-Philipp, Thommen Kathrin, Amrein Melissa, Rumora Klara, Schäfer Ibrahim, Caobelli Federico, Wild Damian, Haaf Philip, Mueller Christian E, Zellweger Michael J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Despite clinical suspicion, most non-invasive ischemia tests for coronary artery disease (CAD) reveal unremarkable results. Patients with a coronary artery calcium score (CACS) of zero rarely have an abnormal positron emission tomography (PET) and could be deferred from further testing. However, most patients have some extent of coronary calcification.
OBJECTIVES: CACS percentiles could be useful to exclude abnormal perfusion in patients with CACS >0, but data from patients with 82Rb PET are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic utility of CACS percentiles in comparison to zero calcium and absolute CACS classes.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspected CAD (n = 1,792) referred for 82Rb PET were included and analyzed for abnormal PET (SSS ≥4) and relevant ischemia (>10% myocardium). Test characteristics were calculated.
RESULTS: The mean age was 65 ± 11 years, 43% were female, and typical angina was reported in 21%. Abnormal PET/relevant ischemia (>10%) were observed in 19.8%/9.3%. Overall, the sensitivity/negative predictive value (NPV) of a <25th percentile CACS to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia were 93.0%/95.7% and 98.2%/99.5%, respectively. The sensitivity/NPV of CACS 1-9 to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia were 96.0%/91.8% and 97.6%/97.6%, respectively. Except for patients <50 years old, sensitivity for abnormal PET was >90.9% in all age groups.
CONCLUSION: In patients >50 years, the <25th percentile and CACS 1-9 had good test characteristics to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia (>10%). They could be used to extend the scope of application of CACS 0 by 8%-10% to 32%-34% overall of patients who could be deferred from further testing.
OBJECTIVES: CACS percentiles could be useful to exclude abnormal perfusion in patients with CACS >0, but data from patients with 82Rb PET are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic utility of CACS percentiles in comparison to zero calcium and absolute CACS classes.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspected CAD (n = 1,792) referred for 82Rb PET were included and analyzed for abnormal PET (SSS ≥4) and relevant ischemia (>10% myocardium). Test characteristics were calculated.
RESULTS: The mean age was 65 ± 11 years, 43% were female, and typical angina was reported in 21%. Abnormal PET/relevant ischemia (>10%) were observed in 19.8%/9.3%. Overall, the sensitivity/negative predictive value (NPV) of a <25th percentile CACS to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia were 93.0%/95.7% and 98.2%/99.5%, respectively. The sensitivity/NPV of CACS 1-9 to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia were 96.0%/91.8% and 97.6%/97.6%, respectively. Except for patients <50 years old, sensitivity for abnormal PET was >90.9% in all age groups.
CONCLUSION: In patients >50 years, the <25th percentile and CACS 1-9 had good test characteristics to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia (>10%). They could be used to extend the scope of application of CACS 0 by 8%-10% to 32%-34% overall of patients who could be deferred from further testing.