ISSN: 1899-0967
Polish Journal of Radiology
Established by prof. Zygmunt Grudziński in 1926 Sun
Current issue Archive About the journal Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Contact Instructions for authors
SCImago Journal & Country Rank


2018
vol. 83
 
Share:
Share:
more
 
 
abstract:
Original paper

Inter-observer agreement of the Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADSTM) in patients with stable chest pain

Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek, Mohamed Magdy Elrakhawy, Mahmoud Mohamed Yossof, Hadeer Mohamed Nageb

© Pol J Radiol 2018; 83: e151-e159
Online publish date: 2018/04/16
View full text
Get citation
ENW
EndNote
BIB
JabRef, Mendeley
RIS
Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero
AMA
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Vancouver
 
Purpose
To assess inter-observer variability of the Coronary Artery Disease – Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) for classifying the degree of coronary artery stenosis in patients with stable chest pain.

Material and methods
A prospective study was conducted upon 96 patients with coronary artery disease, who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA). The images were classified using the CAD-RAD system according to the degree of stenosis, the presence of a modifier: graft (G), stent (S), vulnerable plaque (V), or non-diagnostic (n) and the associated coronary anomalies, and non-coronary cardiac and extra-cardiac findings. Image analysis was performed by two reviewers. Inter-observer agreement was assessed.

Results
There was excellent inter-observer agreement for CAD-RADS (k = 0.862), at 88.5%. There was excellent agreement for CAD-RADS 0 (k = 1.0), CAD-RADS 1 (k = 0.92), CAD-RADS 3 (k = 0.808), CAD-RADS 4 (k = 0.826), and CAD-RADS 5 (k = 0.833) and good agreement for CAD-RADS 2 (k = 0.76). There was excellent agreement for modifier G (k = 1.0) and modifier S (k = 1.0), good agreement for modifier N (k = 0.79), and moderate agreement for modifier V (k = 0.59). There was excellent agreement for associated coronary artery anomalies (k = 0.845), non-coronary cardiac findings (k = 0.857), and extra-cardiac findings (k = 0.81).

Conclusions
There is inter-observer agreement of CAD-RADS in categorising the degree of coronary arteries stenosis, and the modifier of the system and associated cardiac and extra-cardiac findings.

keywords:

coronary artery, CAD-RADS, CT angiography, graft, stent

references:
Eisen A, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E. Updates on Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Review. JAMA Cardiol 2016; 1: 718-730.
Mack M, Gopal A. Epidemiology, traditional and novel risk factors in coronary artery disease. Cardiol Clin 2014; 32: 323-332.
Hollander JE, Than M, Mueller C. State-of-the-Art Evaluation of Emergency Department Patients Presenting With Potential Acute Coronary Syndromes. Circulation 2016; 134: 547-564.
Balfour PC Jr, Gonzalez JA, Kramer CM. Non-invasive assessment of low- and intermediate-risk patients with chest pain. Trends Cardiovasc Med 2017; 27: 182-189.
Earls JP, Woodard PK, Abbara S, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria Asymptomatic Patient at Risk for Coronary Artery Disease.
J Am Coll Radiol 2014; 11: 12-19.
Saremi F. Cardiac MR Imaging in Acute Coronary Syndrome: Application and Image Interpretation. Radiology 2017; 282: 17-32.
François CJ. Current state of the art cardiovascular MR imaging techniques for assessment of ischemic heart disease. Radiol Clin North Am 2015; 53: 335-344.
Yoo SM, Chun EJ, Lee HY, et al. Computed Tomography Diagnosis of Nonspecific Acute Chest Pain in the Emergency Department: From Typical Acute Coronary Syndrome to Various Unusual Mimics. J Thorac Imaging 2017; 32: 26-35.
Bittencourt MS, Hulten EA, Veeranna V, et al. Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography in the Evaluation of Chest Pain of Suspected Cardiac Origin. Circulation 2016; 133: 1963-1968.
Maffei E, Seitun S, Guaricci AI, et al. Chest pain: coronary CT in the ER. Br J Radiol 2016; 89: 20150954.
Chlett CL, Hoffmann U, Geisler T, et al. Cardiac computed tomography for the evaluation of the acute chest pain syndrome: state of the art. Radiol Clin North Am 2015; 53: 297-305.
Nieman K, Hoffmann U. Cardiac computed tomography in patients with acute chest pain. Eur Heart J 2015; 36: 906-914.
Rao AA, Feneis J, Lalonde C, et al. A Pictorial Review of Changes in the BI-RADS Fifth Edition. Radiographics 2016; 36: 623-639.
Grant EG, Tessler FN, Hoang JK, et al. Thyroid Ultrasound Reporting Lexicon: White Paper of the ACR Thyroid Imaging, Reporting and Data System (TIRADS) Committee. J Am Coll Radiol 2015; 12: 1272-1279.
Greer MD, Brown AM, Shih JH, et al. Accuracy and agreement of PIRADSv2 for prostate cancer mpMRI: A multireader study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017; 45: 579-585.
Abdel Razek AA, Ashmalla GA, Gaballa G, et al. Pilot study of ultrasound parotid imaging reporting and data system [PIRADS]: Inter-observer agreement. Eur J Radiol 2015; 84: 2533-2538.
Chandrashekhar Y, Min JK, Hecht H, et al. CAD-RADS: A Giant First Step toward a Common Lexicon? JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2016; 9: 1125-1129.
Cury RC, Abbara S, Achenbach S, et al. Coronary Artery Disease – Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS): An Expert Consensus Document of SCCT, ACR and NASCI: Endorsed by the ACC. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2016; 9: 1099-1113.
Cury RC, Abbara S, Achenbach S, et al. CAD-RADSTM Coronary Artery Disease – Reporting and Data System. An expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2016; 10: 269-281.
Cury RC, Abbara S, Achenbach S, et al. CAD-RADSTM: Coronary Artery Disease – Reporting and Data System: An Expert Consensus Document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology. J Am Coll Radiol 2016; 13:1458-1466.
Gu H, Gao Y, Wang H, et al. Difference of coronary stenosis severity between systolic and diastolic phases in quantitative CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2017; 11: 105-110.
Plank F, Burghard P, Friedrich G, et al. Quantitative coronary CT angiography: absolute lumen sizing rather than %stenosis predicts hemodynamically relevant stenosis. Eur Radiol 2016; 26: 3781-3789.
Pugliese F, Hunink MG, Gruszczynska K, et al. Learning curve for coronary CT angiography – what constitutes sufficient training. Radiology 2009; 251: 359-368.
Saremi F, Achenbach S. Coronary plaque characterization using CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 204: W249-60.
Szilveszter B, Celeng C, Maurovich-Horvat P. Plaque assessment by coronary CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2016; 32: 161-172.
Piccolo R, Giustino G, Mehran R, et al. Stable coronary artery disease: revascularisation and invasive strategies. Lancet 2015; 386: 702-713.
Suh YJ, Hong YJ, Lee HJ, et al. Accuracy of CT for Selecting Candidates for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Combination with the SYNTAX Score. Radiology 2015; 276: 390-399.
Tesche C, De Cecco CN, Vliegenthart R, et al. Coronary CT angiography-derived quantitative markers for predicting in-stent restenosis. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2016; 10: 377-383.
Amanuma M, Kondo T, Sano T, et al. Assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: value of subtraction coronary computed tomography angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2016; 32: 661-670.
Öztürk E, Kafadar C, Tutar S, et al. Non-coronary abnormalities of the left heart: CT angiography findings. Anatol J Cardiol 2016; 16: 720-727.
Venkatesh V, You JJ, Landry DJ, et al. Extracardiac findings in cardiac computed tomographic angiography in patients at low to intermediate risk for coronary artery disease. Can Assoc Radiol J 2010; 61: 286-290.
Shuaib W, Arepalli C, Vijayasarathi A, et al. Coronary anomalies encountered in the acute setting: an imaging review. Emerg Radiol 2014; 21: 631-641.
Tabari A, Lo Gullo R, Murugan V, et al. Recent Advances in Computed Tomographic Technology: Cardiopulmonary Imaging Applications. J Thorac Imaging 2017; 32: 89-100.
Machida H, Tanaka I, Fukui R, et al. Current and Novel Imaging Techniques in Coronary CT. Radiographics 2015; 35: 991-1010.
Abdel Razek AA, Denewer AT, Hegazy MA, et al. Role of computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis of vascular stenosis in head and neck microvascular free flap reconstruction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014;43:811-815.
Abdel Razek A, Ashmalla G, Samir S. Clinical value of classification of venous malformations with contrast enhanced MR angiography. Phlebology 2017; 32: 628-633.
Razek AA, Gaballa G, Megahed AS, et al. Time resolved imaging of contrast kinetics (TRICKS) MR angiography of arteriovenous malformations of head and neck. Eur J Radiol 2013; 82: 1885-18591.
Romeih S, Al-Sheshtawy F, Salama M, et al. Comparison of contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography with invasive cardiac catheterization for evaluation of children with pulmonary atresia. Heart Int 2012; 7: e9.
Razek AA, Saad E, Soliman N, et al. Assessment of vascular disorders of the upper extremity with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography: pictorial review. Jpn J Radiol 2010; 28: 87-94.
 
Quick links
© 2018 Termedia Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
Developed by Bentus.
PayU - płatności internetowe