We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can Discrepancies Between Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography and Cardiac Catheterization in High-Risk Patients be Overcome With Consensus Reading?
Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 2017 January
OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence and cause of discrepancies between coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) and catheterization in a high-risk, diverse, predominantly overweight inner-city population.
METHODS: Ninety-two patients who underwent coronary CTA and catheterization on March 2007 to December 2012 were retrospectively identified. Clinical coronary CTA interpretation and reinterpretation by a review panel was compared with catheterization results.
RESULTS: Severe stenosis was present on catheterization in 65% (60/92). Clinical coronary CTA was concordant with catheterization for severe stenosis in 78% (72/92), whereas panel interpretation was concordant in 77% (70/91). Sensitivity and specificity of clinical and panel coronary CTA interpretations were 92% (55/60) and 53% (17/32) versus 82% (48/59) and 68% (22/32), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Both coronary CTA interpretations were concordant with catheterization for severe stenosis in three quarters of patients. However, the diagnostic profile of the 2 interpretations differed, with higher sensitivity for the clinical report. This supports the clinical practice, which favored overestimation of difficult to quantify stenoses.
METHODS: Ninety-two patients who underwent coronary CTA and catheterization on March 2007 to December 2012 were retrospectively identified. Clinical coronary CTA interpretation and reinterpretation by a review panel was compared with catheterization results.
RESULTS: Severe stenosis was present on catheterization in 65% (60/92). Clinical coronary CTA was concordant with catheterization for severe stenosis in 78% (72/92), whereas panel interpretation was concordant in 77% (70/91). Sensitivity and specificity of clinical and panel coronary CTA interpretations were 92% (55/60) and 53% (17/32) versus 82% (48/59) and 68% (22/32), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Both coronary CTA interpretations were concordant with catheterization for severe stenosis in three quarters of patients. However, the diagnostic profile of the 2 interpretations differed, with higher sensitivity for the clinical report. This supports the clinical practice, which favored overestimation of difficult to quantify stenoses.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app