Intraindividual Comparison of Ultrahigh-Spatial-Resolution Photon-Counting Detector CT and Energy-Integrating Detector CT for Coronary Stenosis Measurement
M. Vecsey-Nagy, Giuseppe Tremamunno, U. Joseph Schoepf, Chiara Gnasso, Emese Zsarnóczay, Nicola Fink, Dmitrij Kravchenko, Moritz C. Halfmann, Gerald S. Laux, Jim O’Doherty, Bálint Szilveszter, Pál Maurovich‐Horvat, Ismail Kabakus, Pál Surányi, Ákos Varga‐Szemes, Tilman Emrich
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A recent simulation study proposed that stenosis measurements on coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography are influenced by the improved spatial resolution of photon-counting detector (PCD)-CT. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the impact of ultrahigh-spatial-resolution (UHR) on coronary stenosis measurements and Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) reclassification rates in patients undergoing coronary CT angiography on both PCD-CT and energy-integrating detector (EID)-CT and to compare measurements against quantitative coronary angiography. METHODS: Patients with coronary calcification on EID-CT (collimation, 192×0.6 mm) were prospectively enrolled for a research coronary CT angiography with UHR PCD-CT (collimation, 120×0.2 mm) within 30 days (between April 1, 2023 and January 31, 2024). PCD-CT was acquired with the same or lower CT dose index and equivalent contrast media volume as EID-CT. Percentage diameter stenosis (PDS) for calcified, partially calcified, and noncalcified lesions were compared between scanners. Patient-level reclassification rates for CAD-RADS were evaluated. The accuracy of PDS measurements was validated against quantitative coronary angiography in patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography. RESULTS: In total, PDS of 278 plaques were quantified in 49 patients (calcified, 202; partially calcified, 51; noncalcified, 25). PCD-CT-based PDS values were lower than EID-CT measurements for calcified (45.1±20.7 versus 54.6±19.2%; P <0.001) and partially calcified plaques (44.3±19.6 versus 54.9±20.0%; P <0.001), without significant differences for noncalcified lesions (39.1±15.2 versus 39.0±16.0%; P =0.98). The reduction in stenosis degrees led to a 49.0% (24/49) reclassification rate to a lower CAD-RADS with PCD-CT. In a subset of 12 patients with 56 lesions, UHR–based PDS values showed higher agreement with quantitative coronary angiography (mean difference, 7.3%; limits of agreement, −10.7%/25.2%) than EID-CT measurements (mean difference, 17.4%; limits of agreement, −6.9%/41.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional EID-CT, UHR PCD-CT results in lower PDS values and more accurate stenosis measurements in coronary plaques with calcified components and leads to a substantial Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System reclassification rate in 49.0% of patients.