Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Keywords

Dual-source computed tomography angiography (DSCTA)320-row coronary in-stent restenosis (CISR)meta-analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Kim

Dean

. In-stent restenosis. Cardiovasc Ther 2011; 29: 190–198.

Cassese

Byrne

Tada

et al.

Incidence and predictors of restenosis after coronary stenting in 10 004 patients with surveillance angiography. Heart 2014; 100: 153–159.

Palmerini

Biondi-Zoccai

Della Riva

et al.

Clinical outcomes with bioabsorbable polymer- versus durable polymer-based drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 63: 299–307.

Alfonso

Byrne

Rivero

et al.

Current treatment of in-stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 63: 2659–2673.

Hamon

Champ-Rigot

Morello

et al.

Diagnostic accuracy of in-stent coronary restenosis detection with multislice spiral computed tomography: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 217–225.

Carrabba

Schuijf

de Graaf

et al.

Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography for the detection of in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis. J Nucl Cardio 2010; 17: 470–478.

Flohr

McCollough

Bruder

et al.

First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 256–268.

Juan

Huang

Sun

et al.

The evolution and investigation of native coronary arteries in patients after coronary stent implantation: A study by 320-detector CT angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2014; 30: 13–24.

Eisentopf

Achenbach

Ulzheimer

et al.

Low-dose dual-source CT angiography with iterative reconstruction for coronary artery stent evaluation. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2013; 6: 458–465.

10.

Kong

Liu

Wang

et al.

Assessment of coronary stent lumen visibility and patency by dual-source computed tomographic angiography. Chin Med Sci J 2010; 32: 601–606.

11.

Oncel

Tastan

et al.

Evaluation of coronary stent patency and in-stent restenosis with dual-source CT coronary angiography without heart rate control. Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191: 56–63.

12.

Pflederer

Marwan

Renz

et al.

Noninvasive assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis by dual-source computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2009; 103: 812–817.

13.

Pugliese

Weustink

Van Mieghem

et al.

Dual source coronary computed tomography angiography for detecting in-stent restenosis. Heart 2008; 94: 848–854.

14.

Tesche

De Cecco

Vliegenthart

et al.

Coronary CT angiography-derived quantitative markers for predicting in-stent restenosis. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2016; 10: 377–383.

15.

Wang

Tao

Huang

et al.

Clinical evaluation of coronary in-stent restenosis using dual-source computed tomography. Echocardiography 2015; 32: 1681–1687.

16.

Wuest

May

Scharf

et al.

Stent evaluation in low-dose coronary CT angiography: Effect of different iterative reconstruction settings. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2013; 7: 319–325.

17.

Xia

Yang

Zhou

et al.

Accuracy of 128-slice dual-source CT using high-pitch spiral mode for the assessment of coronary stents: First in vivo experience. Eur J Radiol 2013; 82: 617–622.

18.

Yang

Wang

Guo

et al.

Value of detecting in-stent restenosis by dual source coronary computed tomography coronary angiography. Chin J Cardio 2011; 39: 49–52.

19.

Zhang

Yang

et al.

Diagnostic accuracy and its affecting factors of dual-source CT for assessment of coronary stents patency and in-stent restenosis. Chin Med J 2012; 125: 1936–1940.

20.

Zhao

Zhang

Fan

et al.

Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for dual source CT of the coronary stent: Comparison of image quality, accuracy, and radiation dose. Eur J Radiol 2011; 77: 436–442.

21.

Yue

Chen

Dou

et al.

Comparative analysis between 64-and 320-slice spiral computed tomography in the display of coronary artery stents and diagnosis of in-stent restenosis. Exp Ther Med 2015; 10: 1871–1876.

22.

Wang

Chen

Wang

et al.

Diagnostic value of 320-slice computed tomography coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. Chin J Cardio 2012; 40: 487–491.

23.

Wan

Tsay

Chen

et al.

Coronary in-stent restenosis: predisposing clinical and stent-related factors, diagnostic performance and analyses of inaccuracies in 320-row computed tomography angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2016; 32: 105–115.

24.

Tatsugami

Higaki

Sakane

et al.

Diagnostic accuracy of in-stent restenosis using model-based iterative reconstruction at coronary CT angiography: Initial experience. Br J Radiol 2017; 91: 247–253.

25.

de Graaf

Schuijf

van Velzen

et al.

Diagnostic accuracy of 320-row multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography to noninvasively assess in-stent restenosis. Invest Radiol 2010; 45: 331–340.

26.

Moher

Shamseer

Clarke

et al.

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015; 4: 1–1.

27.

Whiting

Rutjes

Westwood

et al.

QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155: 529–536.

28.

Deeks

Macaskill

Irwig

. The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol 2005; 58: 882–893.

29.

Zhang

Chen

et al.

Adenosine triphosphate stress 99mTc-methoxyisobutylisonitrile gated myocardial perfusion imaging efficacy in diagnosing stent restenosis following coronary stent implantation. Exp Ther Med 2016; 12: 3897–904.

30.

Hitchner

Zhou

. Utilization of intravascular ultrasound during carotid artery stenting. Int J Angio 2015; 24: 185–188.

31.

Hamer

Borisch

Paetzel

et al.

In vitro evaluation of stent patency and in-stent stenoses in 10 metallic stents using MR angiography. Br J Radiol 2006; 79: 636–643.

32.

Gilard

Cornily

Pennec

et al.

Assessment of coronary artery stents by 16 slice computed tomography. Heart 2006; 92: 58–61.

33.

Papini

Casolo

Di Leo

et al.

In vivo assessment of coronary stents with 64-row multidetector computed tomography: analysis of metal artifacts. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2010; 34: 921–926.

34.

Shuman

Branch

May

et al.

Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology 2008; 248: 431–437.

35.

Zimmerman

Kral

Fishman

. Diagnostic quality of dual-source coronary CT examinations performed without heart rate control: importance of obesity and heart rate on image quality. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2014; 38: 949–955.

36.

Dey

Schepis

Marwan

et al.

Automated three-dimensional quantification of noncalcified coronary plaque from coronary CT angiography: comparison with intravascular US. Radiology 2010; 257: 516–522.

37.

Zhang

et al.

Coronary stent occlusion: reverse attenuation gradient sign observed at computed tomography angiography improves diagnostic performance. Eur Radiol 2015; 25: 568–574.

38.

Wintersperger

Nikolaou

von Ziegler

et al.

Image quality, motion artifacts, and reconstruction timing of 64-slice coronary computed tomography angiography with 0.33-second rotation speed. Invest Radiol 2006; 41: 436–442.

39.

Ivanov

Kashcheev

Chekin

et al.

Estimating the lifetime risk of cancer associated with multiple CT scans. J Radiol Prot 2014; 34: 825–841.

40.

Maintz

Burg

Seifarth

et al.

Update on multidetector coronary CT angiography of coronary stents: in vitro evaluation of 29 different stent types with dual-source CT. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 42–49.

RETRACTED: Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source and 320-row computed tomography angiography in detecting coronary in-stent restenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References