Opportunities and Challenges of Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography in the Investigation of Chest Pain in the Emergency Department—A Narrative Review

References

1. Emergency department care activity. Aust Inst Health Welf. n.d.
   https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports-data/myhospitals/intersection/activity/ed

   Date accessed: September 21, 2021
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
2. • Cullen L.
   • Greenslade J.
   • Merollini K.
   • Graves N.
   • Hammett C.J.K.
   • Hawkins T.
   • et al.
   Cost and outcomes of assessing patients with chest pain in an Australian emergency department.
   Med J Aust. 2015; 202: 427-432
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
3. • Long B.
   • Oliver J.
   • Streitz M.
   • Koyfman A.
   An end-user’s guide to the HEART score and pathway.
   Am J Emerg Med. 2017; 35: 1350-1355
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
4. • Backus B.E.
   • Six A.J.
   • Kelder J.C.
   • Bosschaert M.A.R.
   • Mast E.G.
   • Mosterd A.
   • et al.
   A prospective validation of the HEART score for chest pain patients at the emergency department.
   Int J Cardiol. 2013; 168: 2153-2158
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
5. • Stephens J.R.
   Things we do for no reason: hospitalization for the evaluation of patients with low-risk chest pain.
   J Hosp Med. 2018; 13
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
6. • Chew D.P.
   • Scott I.A.
   • Cullen L.
   • French J.K.
   • Briffa T.G.
   • Tideman P.A.
   • et al.
   National Heart Foundation of Australia & Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand: Australian clinical guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes 2016.
   Heart Lung Circ. 2016; 25: 895-951
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
7. • Knuuti J.
   • Wijns W.
   • Saraste A.
   • Capodanno D.
   • Barbato E.
   • Funck-Brentano C.
   • et al.
   2019 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes: the task force for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).
   Eur Heart J. 2020; 41: 407-477
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
8. • Moss A.J.
   • Williams M.C.
   • Newby D.E.
   • Nicol E.D.
   The updated NICE guidelines: cardiac CT as the first-line test for coronary artery disease.
   Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep. 2017; 10 (15)
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
9. • Gulati M.
   • Levy P.D.
   • Mukherjee D.
   • Amsterdam E.
   • Bhatt D.L.
   • Birtcher K.K.
   • et al.
   2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association joint committee on clinical practice guidelines.
   Circulation. 2021; 144: e368-e454
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
10. • Australian Government Department of Health
    Taskforce-endorsed report—Cardiac Services Clinical Committee. Aust Gov Dep Health. 2021.
    https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/taskforce-endorsed-report-cardiac-services-clinical-committee

    Date accessed: September 21, 2021
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
11. • Tonino P.A.L.
    • Fearon W.F.
    • De Bruyne B.
    • Oldroyd K.G.
    • Leesar M.A.
    • Ver Lee P.N.
    • et al.
    Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study: fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010; 55: 2816-2821
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
12. • Dai N.
    • Zhang X.
    • Zhang Y.
    • Hou L.
    • Li W.
    • Fan B.
    • et al.
    Enhanced diagnostic utility achieved by myocardial blood analysis: a meta-analysis of noninvasive cardiac imaging in the detection of functional coronary artery disease.
    Int J Cardiol. 2016; 221: 665-673
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
13. • Danad I.
    • Szymonifka J.
    • Twisk J.W.R.
    • Norgaard B.L.
    • Zarins C.K.
    • Knaapen P.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic performance of cardiac imaging methods to diagnose ischaemia-causing coronary artery disease when directly compared with fractional flow reserve as a reference standard: a meta-analysis.
    Eur Heart J. 2017; 38: 991-998
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
14. • Takx R.A.P.
    • Blomberg B.A.
    • El Aidi H.
    • Habets J.
    • de Jong P.A.
    • Nagel E.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic accuracy of stress myocardial perfusion imaging compared to invasive coronary angiography with fractional flow reserve meta-analysis. 8. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, 2015
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
15. • Danad I.
    • Raijmakers P.G.
    • Driessen R.S.
    • Leipsic J.
    • Raju R.
    • Naoum C.
    • et al.
    Comparison of Coronary CT angiography, SPECT, PET, and hybrid imaging for diagnosis of ischemic heart disease determined by fractional flow reserve.
    JAMA Cardiol. 2017; 2: 1100-1107
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
16. • Driessen R.S.
    • Danad I.
    • Stuijfzand W.J.
    • Raijmakers P.G.
    • Schumacher S.P.
    • van Diemen P.A.
    • et al.
    Comparison of coronary computed tomography angiography, fractional flow reserve, and perfusion imaging for ischemia diagnosis.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019; 73: 161-173
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
17. • Budoff M.J.
    • Dowe D.
    • Jollis J.G.
    • Gitter M.
    • Sutherland J.
    • Halamert E.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52: 1724-1732
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
18. • Meijboom W.B.
    • Meijs M.F.L.
    • Schuijf J.D.
    • Cramer M.J.
    • Mollet N.R.
    • van Mieghem C.A.G.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52: 2135-2144
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
19. • Arbab-Zadeh A.
    • Miller J.M.
    • Rochitte C.E.
    • Dewey M.
    • Niinuma H.
    • Gottlieb I.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography coronary angiography according to pre-test probability of coronary artery disease and severity of coronary arterial calcification. The CORE-64 (coronary artery evaluation using 64-row multidetector computed tomography angiography) international multicenter study.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 59: 379-387
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
20. • Linde J.J.
    • Kelbæk H.
    • Hansen T.F.
    • Sigvardsen P.E.
    • Torp-Pedersen C.
    • Bech J.
    • et al.
    Coronary CT angiography in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020; 75: 453-463
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
21. • Andreini D.
    • Pontone G.
    • Mushtaq S.
    • Conte E.
    • Guglielmo M.
    • Mancini M.E.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic accuracy of coronary CT angiography performed in 100 consecutive patients with coronary stents using a whole-organ high-definition CT scanner.
    Int J Cardiol. 2019; 274: 382-387
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
22. • Serruys P.W.
    • Hara H.
    • Garg S.
    • Kawashima H.
    • Nørgaard B.L.
    • Dweck M.R.
    • et al.
    Coronary computed tomographic angiography for complete assessment of coronary artery disease.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021; 78: 713-736
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
23. • Mancini G.B.J.
    • Leipsic J.
    • Budoff M.J.
    • Hague C.J.
    • Min J.K.
    • Stevens S.R.
    • et al.
    CT angiography followed by invasive angiography in patients with moderate or severe ischemia—insights from the ISCHEMIA trial.
    JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021; 14: 1384-1393
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
24. • Chow B.J.W.
    • Small G.
    • Yam Y.
    • Chen L.
    • Achenbach S.
    • Al-Mallah M.
    • et al.
    Incremental prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography in coronary artery disease using CONFIRM: COroNary computed tomography angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: an InteRnational Multicenter registry.
    Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011; 4: 463-472
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
25. • Chow B.J.W.
    • Yam Y.
    • Small G.
    • Wells G.A.
    • Crean A.M.
    • Ruddy T.D.
    • et al.
    Prognostic durability of coronary computed tomography angiography.
    Eur Heart J—Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020;
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
26. • Newby D.E.
    • Adamson P.D.
    • Berry C.
    • Boon N.A.
    • Dweck M.R.
    • et al.
    • SCOT-HEART Investigators
    Coronary CT angiography and 5-year risk of myocardial infarction.
    N Engl J Med. 2018; 379: 924-933
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
27. • Hoffmann U.
    • Ferencik M.
    • Udelson J.E.
    • Picard M.H.
    • Truong Q.A.
    • Patel M.R.
    • et al.
    Prognostic value of noninvasive cardiovascular testing in patients with stable chest pain: insights from the PROMISE trial (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain).
    Circulation. 2017; 135: 2320-2332
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
28. • Bittencourt M.S.
    • Hulten E.
    • Ghoshhajra B.
    • O’Leary D.
    • Christman M.P.
    • Montana P.
    • et al.
    Prognostic value of nonobstructive and obstructive coronary artery disease detected by coronary computed tomography angiography to identify cardiovascular events.
    Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014; 7: 282-291
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
29. • SCOT-HEART investigators
    CT coronary angiography in patients with suspected angina due to coronary heart disease (SCOT-HEART): an open-label, parallel-group, multicentre trial.
    Lancet Lond Engl. 2015; 385: 2383-2391
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
30. • Douglas P.S.
    • Hoffmann U.
    • Patel M.R.
    • Mark D.B.
    • Al-Khalidi H.R.
    • Cavanaugh B.
    • et al.
    Outcomes of anatomical versus functional testing for coronary artery disease.
    N Engl J Med. 2015; 372: 1291-1300
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
31. • Gray A.J.
    • Roobottom C.
    • Smith J.E.
    • Goodacre S.
    • Oatey K.
    • O’Brien R.
    • et al.
    Early computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome: randomised controlled trial.
    BMJ. 2021; 374: n2106
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
32. • Finck T.
    • Hardenberg J.
    • Will A.
    • Hendrich E.
    • Haller B.
    • Martinoff S.
    • et al.
    10-year follow-up after coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease.
    JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019; 12: 1330-1338
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
33. • Ayoub C.
    • Erthal F.
    • Abdelsalam M.A.
    • Murad M.H.
    • Wang Z.
    • Erwin P.J.
    • et al.
    Prognostic value of segment involvement score compared to other measures of coronary atherosclerosis by computed tomography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2017; 11: 258-267
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
34. • Min J.K.
    • Dunning A.
    • Lin F.Y.
    • Achenbach S.
    • Al-Mallah M.
    • Budoff M.J.
    • et al.
    Age- and sex-related differences in all-cause mortality risk based on coronary computed tomography angiography findings: results from the international multicenter CONFIRM (Coronary CT Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: an international multicenter registry) of 23,854 patients without known coronary artery disease.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011; 58: 849-860
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
35. • Hadamitzky M.
    • Täubert S.
    • Deseive S.
    • Martinoff S.
    • Schoemig A.
    • Hausleiter J.
    Prognostic value of coronary computed tomography angiography during 5 years of follow up in patients with suspected coronary artery disease.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 59: E1323
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
36. • Nørgaard B.L.
    • Gaur S.
    • Fairbairn T.A.
    • Douglas P.S.
    • Jensen J.M.
    • Patel M.R.
    • et al.
    Prognostic value of coronary computed tomography angiographic derived fractional flow reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Heart. 2021; (heartjnl-2021-319773)
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
37. • Ihdayhid A.R.
    • Yong A.
    • Harper R.
    • Rankin J.
    • Wong C.
    • Brown A.J.
    • et al.
    A practical guide for fractional flow reserve guided revascularisation.
    Heart Lung Circ. 2018; 27: 406-419
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
38. • Mickley H.
    • Veien K.T.
    • Gerke O.
    • Lambrechtsen J.
    • Rohold A.
    • Steffensen F.H.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic and clinical value of FFRCT in stable chest pain patients with extensive coronary calcification.
    JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022; S1936878X21009104
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
39. • Khav N.
    • Ihdayhid A.R.
    • Ko B.
    CT-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) in the evaluation of coronary artery disease.
    Heart Lung Circ. 2020; 29: 1621-1632
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
40. • Pontone G.
    • Weir-McCall J.R.
    • Baggiano A.
    • Del Torto A.
    • Fusini L.
    • Guglielmo M.
    • et al.
    Determinants of rejection rate for coronary CT angiography fractional flow reserve analysis.
    Radiology. 2019; 292: 597-605
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
41. • Gonzalez J.A.
    • Lipinski M.J.
    • Flors L.
    • Shaw P.W.
    • Kramer C.M.
    • Salerno M.
    Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomography angiography, computed tomography perfusion, and computed tomography-fractional flow reserve in functional myocardial ischemia assessment versus invasive fractional flow reserve.
    Am J Cardiol. 2015; 116: 1469-1478
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
42. • Hamilton-Craig C.
    • Fifoot A.
    • Hansen M.
    • Pincus M.
    • Chan J.
    • Walters D.L.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic performance and cost of CT angiography versus stress ECG—A randomized prospective study of suspected acute coronary syndrome chest pain in the emergency department (CT-COMPARE).
    Int J Cardiol. 2014; 177: 867-873
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
43. • Leong C.L.
    • Teoh T.W.
    • Bentley L.
    • O’Rourke E.
    • Allright A.
    • Werkmeister M.
    • et al.
    Resource implications following expansion of computed tomography coronary angiography: an Australian experience.
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2021; (n/a)
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
44. • Hirshfeld J.W.
    • Ferrari V.A.
    • Bengel F.M.
    • Bergersen L.
    • Chambers C.E.
    • Einstein A.J.
    • et al.
    2018 ACC/HRS/NASCI/SCAI/SCCT Expert consensus document on optimal use of ionizing radiation in cardiovascular imaging—best practices for safety and effectiveness, Part 1: radiation physics and radiation biology.
    J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 71: 2811-2828
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
45. • Hausleiter J.
    • Meyer T.
    • Hermann F.
    • Hadamitzky M.
    • Krebs M.
    • Gerber T.C.
    • et al.
    Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography.
    JAMA. 2009; 301: 500-507
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
46. • Hausleiter J.
    • Martinoff S.
    • Hadamitzky M.
    • Martuscelli E.
    • Pschierer I.
    • Feuchtner G.M.
    • et al.
    Image quality and radiation exposure with a low tube voltage protocol for coronary CT angiography: results of the PROTECTION II Trial.
    JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010; 3: 1113-1123
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
47. • Hausleiter J.
    • Meyer T.S.
    • Martuscelli E.
    • Spagnolo P.
    • Yamamoto H.
    • Carrascosa P.
    • et al.
    Image quality and radiation exposure with prospectively ECG-triggered axial scanning for coronary CT angiography: the multicenter, multivendor, randomized PROTECTION-III study.
    JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012; 5: 484-493
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
48. • Deseive S.
    • Pugliese F.
    • Meave A.
    • Alexanderson E.
    • Martinoff S.
    • Hadamitzky M.
    • et al.
    Image quality and radiation dose of a prospectively electrocardiography-triggered high-pitch data acquisition strategy for coronary CT angiography: the multicenter, randomized PROTECTION IV study.
    J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2015; 9: 278-285
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
49. • Deseive S.
    • Chen M.Y.
    • Korosoglou G.
    • Leipsic J.
    • Martuscelli E.
    • Carrascosa P.
    • et al.
    Prospective randomized trial on radiation dose estimates of CT angiography applying iterative image reconstruction: the PROTECTION V study.
    JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 8: 888-896
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
50. • Stocker T.J.
    • Deseive S.
    • Leipsic J.
    • Hadamitzky M.
    • Chen M.Y.
    • Rubinshtein R.
    • et al.
    Reduction in radiation exposure in cardiovascular computed tomography imaging: results from the PROspective multicenter registry on radiaTion dose Estimates of cardiac CT angIOgraphy iN daily practice in 2017 (PROTECTION VI).
    Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 3715-3723
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
51. • Huse O.
    • Hettiarachchi J.
    • Gearon E.
    • Nichols M.
    • Allender S.
    • Peeters A.
    Obesity in Australia.
    Obes Res Clin Pract. 2018; 12: 29-39
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
52. • Hoffmann U.
    • Truong Q.A.
    • Schoenfeld D.A.
    • Chou E.T.
    • Woodard P.K.
    • Nagurney J.T.
    • et al.
    Coronary CT angiography versus standard evaluation in acute chest pain.
    N Engl J Med. 2012; 367: 299-308
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
53. • Hamilton-Craig C.R.
    • Tandon K.
    • Kwan B.
    • DeBoni K.
    • Burley C.
    • Wesley A.J.
    • et al.
    Coronary CT radiation dose reduction strategies at an Australian tertiary care center—improvements in radiation exposure through an evidence-based approach.
    J Med Radiat Sci. 2020; 67: 25-33
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar

54. ARPANSA n.d. Current Australian national diagnostic reference levels for multi detector computed tomography https://www.arpansa.gov.au/research-and-expertise/surveys/national-diagnostic-reference-level-service/current-australian-drls/mdct (accessed January 3, 2023).

    View in Article

    • Google Scholar