» Articles » PMID: 38166336

Artificial Intelligence-based Coronary Stenosis Quantification at Coronary CT Angiography Versus Quantitative Coronary Angiography

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the performance of a new artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool by comparing the quantified stenosis severity at coronary CT angiography (CCTA) with a reference standard derived from invasive quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). Materials and Methods This secondary, post hoc analysis included 120 participants (mean age, 59.7 years ± 10.8 [SD]; 73 [60.8%] men, 47 [39.2%] women) from three large clinical trials (AFFECTS, P3, REFINE) who underwent CCTA and invasive coronary angiography with QCA. Quantitative analysis of coronary stenosis severity at CCTA was performed using an AI-based coronary stenosis quantification (AI-CSQ) software service. Blinded comparison between QCA and AI-CSQ was measured on a per-vessel and per-patient basis. Results The per-vessel AI-CSQ diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 80%, 88%, 86%, 65%, and 94%, respectively, for diameter stenosis (DS) 50% or greater; and 78%, 92%, 91%, 47%, and 98%, respectively, for DS 70% or greater. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) to predict DS of 50% or greater and 70% or greater on a per-vessel basis were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.95; < .001) and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.97; < .001), respectively. The AUCs to predict DS of 50% or greater and 70% or greater on a per-patient basis were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.97; < .001) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.94; < .001), respectively. Conclusion AI-CSQ at CCTA demonstrated a high diagnostic performance compared with QCA both on a per-patient and per-vessel basis, with high sensitivity for stenosis detection. CT Angiography, Cardiac, Coronary Arteries Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.

Citing Articles

Computed Tomography Angiography in the Catheterization Laboratory: A Guide Towards Optimizing Coronary Interventions.

Beneki E, Dimitriadis K, Pyrpyris N, Antonopoulos A, Aznaouridis K, Antiochos P J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2025; 12(1).

PMID: 39852306 PMC: 11766008. DOI: 10.3390/jcdd12010028.


Coronary angiography: a review of the state of the art and the evolution of angiography in cardio therapeutics.

Gurav A, Revaiah P, Tsai T, Miyashita K, Tobe A, Oshima A Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 11:1468888.

PMID: 39654943 PMC: 11625592. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1468888.


Assessing the need for coronary angiography in high-risk non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome patients using artificial intelligence and computed tomography.

Cagnina A, Salihu A, Meier D, Luangphiphat W, Faltin B, Skalidis I Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2024; 41(1):55-61.

PMID: 39514142 PMC: 11742328. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-024-03283-9.


Revolutionizing Cardiac Imaging: A Scoping Review of Artificial Intelligence in Echocardiography, CTA, and Cardiac MRI.

Moradi A, Olanisa O, Nzeako T, Shahrokhi M, Esfahani E, Fakher N J Imaging. 2024; 10(8).

PMID: 39194982 PMC: 11355719. DOI: 10.3390/jimaging10080193.


Temporal changes in CT-derived fractional flow reserve in patients after heart transplantation.

Sharma S, Sanz J, Hirsch A, Patel R, Constantinescu A, Barghash M Eur Radiol. 2024; 35(1):232-243.

PMID: 39014089 PMC: 11631993. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-10932-z.


References
1.
Lin A, Manral N, McElhinney P, Killekar A, Matsumoto H, Kwiecinski J . Deep learning-enabled coronary CT angiography for plaque and stenosis quantification and cardiac risk prediction: an international multicentre study. Lancet Digit Health. 2022; 4(4):e256-e265. PMC: 9047317. DOI: 10.1016/S2589-7500(22)00022-X. View

2.
Cury R, Leipsic J, Abbara S, Achenbach S, Berman D, Bittencourt M . CAD-RADS™ 2.0 - 2022 Coronary Artery Disease-Reporting and Data System: An Expert Consensus Document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American College of Radiology (ACR), and.... J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2022; 16(6):536-557. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2022.07.002. View

3.
Williams M, Hunter A, Shah A, Assi V, Lewis S, Smith J . Use of Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography to Guide Management of Patients With Coronary Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; 67(15):1759-1768. PMC: 4829708. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.02.026. View

4.
Liu T, Maurovich-Horvat P, Mayrhofer T, Puchner S, Lu M, Ghemigian K . Quantitative coronary plaque analysis predicts high-risk plaque morphology on coronary computed tomography angiography: results from the ROMICAT II trial. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017; 34(2):311-319. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-017-1228-6. View

5.
Thomsen C, Abdulla J . Characteristics of high-risk coronary plaques identified by computed tomographic angiography and associated prognosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 17(2):120-9. PMC: 4882896. DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jev325. View