@article {218017, title = {Coronary computed tomography versus coronary angiography for preoperative coronary assessment before valve surgery.}, journal = {The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology}, volume = {73}, year = {2021}, pages = {63}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Conventional coronary angiography (CAG) is currently the gold standard technique for the assessment of coronary arteries prior to cardiac valve surgery. Although CAG is a relatively safe procedure, however, it is still an invasive procedure, and it has potential hazards and complications. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is a non-invasive technique that has emerged robustly as an excellent and attractive tool for delineating coronary anatomy. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the accuracy of CCTA when compared with the gold standard CAG in the evaluation of coronary arteries before valve surgery. We screened 111 consecutive patients with VHD undergoing a routine cardiac catheterization for preoperative evaluation of CAD. Fifty patients were eligible and underwent both CAG and CCTA. Significant coronary stenosis was defined as a luminal diameter decrease of >= 50\%. Additionally, ectasia, calcifications, and congenital coronary anomalies were analyzed. Also, we compared both techniques regarding radiation dose, contrast volume, and complications. Non-evaluable segments were excluded from all levels of analysis. Sixty-one patients were excluded from the study due to various reasons.

RESULTS: Among the 50 patients of the study population, 27 (54\%) were males. The prevalence of significant CAD in the study population was 19.6\% according to the patient-based analysis, and CAG could have been avoided in 80.4\% of patients with a true-negative CCTA result. Diagnostic accuracy of CCTA for detection of significant stenosis was evaluated regarding sensitivity and specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall accuracy of CCTA, which was 87.5\%, 99.6\%,87.5\%, 99.6\%, and 99.2\%, respectively, for segmental-based analysis; 86\%, 100\%, 100\%, 99\%, and 99\%, respectively, for vessel-based analysis; and 77.8\%,100\%,100\%, 94.9\%, and 95.7\%, respectively, for patient-based analysis. Fewer rates of complications were encountered with CCTA. Additional information obtained like calcifications and congenital anomalies was diagnosed better with CCTA than CAG.

CONCLUSION: Owing mainly to its high negative predictive value, a well-performed CCTA exam is an excellent method to rule out coronary artery disease, specially in patients who are not at high risk of atherosclerosis.

}, author = {Abdalla Elagha and Khaled, Waleed and Gamal, Sahar and Mohamed Helmy and Ayman Kaddah} }