Hoesein, Firdaus A. A. Mohamed

Abstract Objectives To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on diagnostic accuracy and other outcomes of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and CT-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) in candidates for trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Background Screening for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) with CCTA during TAVI work-up could prevent unnecessary invasive coronary angiography (ICA). This becomes increasingly relevant as the TAVI-population grows. CT-FFR improves CCTA accuracy in chest pain patients, but its reliability is unknown in the TAVI-population. Methods Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science were searched for studies regarding CCTA and/or CT-FFR in TAVI-candidates. Primary endpoint was correct identification and rule-out of obstructive CAD. Results were pooled in a meta-analysis. Results Twenty-four of the 29 included articles were part of the meta-analysis, reporting results for CCTA and CT-FFR in 3.494 and 797 patients respectively. Reference standard was anatomical severity of CAD in most studies. At patient-level, pooled CCTA sensitivity was 94.3% and specificity 74.8%. CT-FFR sensitivity was 91.5% and specificity 60.3% with strong variation between studies. CCTA correctly ruled out CAD in 52% of all patients, but 42% of positive CCTAs were false positives. CT-FFR correctly ruled out CAD in 47% of all patients included in this meta-analysis, but showed better accuracy than CCTA in studies that compared both. In these studies, sensitivity of CCTA versus CT-FFR was 70.7% versus 79.0% and specificity was 64.4% versus 92.9%. Conclusions Negative CCTA effectively rules-out CAD in the TAVI-population. Adding CCTA to TAVI work-up could lead to significant reduction in pre-TAVI ICA procedures, but the proportion of false-positives remains high. In studies performing a direct comparison, CT-FFR performed better than CCTA. This is not reflected in the CT-FFR meta-analysis. Therefore, diagnostic accuracy of CT-FFR and added value over CCTA in the TAVI-population remains unclear. Further research regarding validation and reliability is warranted.Meta-analysis of CCTA and CT-FFR

Abstract Objectives The addition of CT-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR-CT) increases the diagnostic accuracy of Coronary CT Angiography (CCTA). We assessed the impact of FFR-CT in routine clinical practice on clinical decision-making and patient prognosis in patients suspected of stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods This retrospective, single-center study compared a cohort that received CCTA with FFR-CT to a historical cohort that received CCTA before FFR-CT was available. We assessed the clinical management decisions after FFR-CT and CCTA and the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) during the one-year follow-up using chi-square tests for independence. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to visualize the occurrence of safety outcomes over time. Results 360 patients at low to intermediate risk of CAD were included, 224 in the CCTA only group and 136 in the FFR-CT group. During follow-up, 13 MACE occurred in 12 patients, 9 (4.0%) in the CCTA-group and three (2.2%) in the FFR-CT group. Clinical management decisions differed significantly between both groups. After CCTA, 60 patients (26.5%) received optimal medical therapy (OMT) only, 115 (51.3%) invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and 49 (21.9%) single positron emission CT (SPECT). After FFR-CT, 106 patients (77.9%) received OMT only, 27 (19.9%) ICA and three (2.2%) SPECT (p<0.001 for all three options). The revascularization rate after ICA was similar between groups (p=0.15). However, patients in the CCTA-group more often underwent revascularization (p=0.007). Conclusion Addition of FFR-CT to CCTA led to a reduction in (invasive) diagnostic testing and less revascularizations without observed difference in outcomes after one year.Clinical decisions and follow upSignificant LAD lesion, negative FFRCT