Rationale and design of advantage (additional diagnostic value of CT perfusion over coronary CT angiography in stented patients with suspected in-stent restenosis or coronary artery disease progression) prospective study

Abstract

Background: Recent studies demonstrated a significant improvement in the diagnostic performance of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) for the evaluation of in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, coronary stent assessment is still challenging, especially because of beam-hardening artifacts due to metallic stent struts and high atherosclerotic burden of non-stented segments. Adenosine-stress myocardial perfusion assessed by CT (CTP) recently demonstrated to be a feasible and accurate tool for evaluating the functional significance of coronary stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Yet, scarce data are available on the performance of CTP in patients with previous stent implantation.

Aim of the study: We aim to assess the diagnostic performance of CCTA alone, CTP alone and CCTA plus CTP performed with a new scanner generation using quantitative invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) as standard of reference.

Methods: We will enroll 300 consecutive patients with previous stent implantation, referred for non-emergent and clinically indicated invasive coronary angiography (ICA) due to suspected ISR or progression of CAD in native coronary segments. All patients will be subjected to stress myocardial CTP and a rest CCTA. The first 150 subjects will undergo static CTP scan, while the following 150 patients will undergo dynamic CTP scan. Measurement of invasive FFR will be performed during ICA when clinically indicated.

Results: The primary study end points will be: 1) assessment of the diagnostic performance (diagnostic rate, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy) of CCTA, CTP, combined CCTA-CTP and concordant CCTA-CTP vs. ICA as standard of reference in a territory-based and patient-based analysis; 2) assessment of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of CCTA, CTP, combined CCTA-CTP and concordant CCTA-CTP vs. invasive FFR as standard of reference in a territory-based analysis.

Conclusions: The ADVANTAGE study aims to provide an answer to the intriguing question whether the combined anatomical and functional assessment with CCTA plus CTP may have higher diagnostic performance as compared to CCTA alone in identifying stented patients with significant ISR or CAD progression.