Abstract
Therapy advice based on dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) in comparison with coronary angiography (CAG) was investigated and the results evaluated after 1-year follow-up. Thirty-three consecutive patients (mean age 61.9 years) underwent DSCT and CAG and were evaluated independently. In an expert reading (the "gold standard"), CAG and DSCT examinations were evaluated simultaneously by an experienced radiologist and cardiologist. Based on the presence of significant stenosis and current guidelines, therapy advice was given by all readers blinded from the results of other readings and clinical information. Patients were treated based on a multidisciplinary team evaluation including all clinical information. In comparison with the gold standard, CAG had a higher specificity (91%) and positive predictive value (PPV) (95%) compared with DSCT (82% and 91%, respectively). DSCT had a higher sensitivity (96%) and negative predictive value (NPV) (89%) compared with CAG (91% and 83%, respectively). The DSCT-based therapy advice did not lead to any patient being denied the revascularization they needed according to the multidisciplinary team evaluation. During follow-up, two patients needed additional revascularization. The high NPV for DSCT for revascularization assessment indicates that DSCT could be safely used to select patients benefiting from medical therapy only.