Predictive Factors of the Presence and Number of Noncalcified Coronary Plaque in Japanese Patients with Zero Coronary Artery Calcium Score Using 64-Slice Multi-Detector Computed Tomography

Yoshiki Noda, Ryo Matsutera, Yoshinori Yasuoka, Kiyoshi Kume, Hidenori Adachi, Susumu Hattori, Ryo Araki, Motohiro Kosugi, Yasuaki Kohama, Tetsufumi Nakashima, Tatsuya Sasaki

Cardiovascular Division, Osaka Minami Medical Center, National Hospital Organization, Osaka, Japan.

DOI: 10.4236/act.2013.23020                

Abstract

Background: Factors that can predict the presence and number of noncalcified coronary plaques (NCP) in Japanese patients with zero coronary artery calcium scores (CACS) essentially remain undefined. Methods and Results: We assessed independent predictors of the presence and number of segments with NCP in 111 Japanese patients with zero CACS who underwent 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography at our hospital. Thirty five patients (32%) had NCP, and 24 patients (22%) had ≥ 2 NCPs. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that significant predictors for the presence of NCP were age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01 - 1.11, p = 0.021), male (OR: 3.61, 95% CI 1.40 - 9.35, p = 0.008) and diabetes mellitus (OR: 3.10, 95% CI 1.02 - 9.45, p = 0.046), and those for the presence of ≥ 2 NCPs were age (OR: 1.08, 95% CI 1.02 - 1.15, p = 0.007) and a current smoking habit (OR: 5.09, 95% CI 1.00 - 25.74, p = 0.049). Multiple linear regression analysis identified advanced age, male gender and diabetes mellitus as independent predictors of the number of NCPs. A novel score calculated from the above four predictors showed moderate accuracy for a diagnosis of NCP and ≥ 2 NCPs, with areas under receiver operating curves of 0.738 and 0.736, respectively. Conclusions: Male Japanese patients with zero CACS, advanced age, diabetes mellitus and a current smoking habit might have NCPs.

Keywords

Zero Coronary Artery Calcium Score; Number of Noncalcified Coronary Plaque; 64-Slice Multi-Detector Computed Tomography; Japanese Patients

1. Introduction

Coronary artery calcium score (CACS) is useful for the risk stratification of coronary artery disease, and zero CACS is associated with a very low likelihood of coronary artery plaque and future cardiac events [1,2]. The recent technical development of multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) has rendered it feasible to calculate CACS and to detect coronary artery plaque or obstructive coronary lesions using CT coronary angiography (CT CA). The presence of obstructive coronary lesions, noncalcified coronary plaque (NCP) or the number of coronary plaques detected by CTCA improves the prediction of cardiac events over and above conventional risk scores and CACS [3-6]. Moreover, NCP with both a low CT value and positive remodeling is associated with the subsequent development of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) [7].

On the other hand, several recent reports have revealed that some patients with zero CACS have NCP or significant coronary artery stenosis [8-20]. Which patients with zero CACS have NCP is important to determine so that they can derive a benefit from further examination using CTCA in addition to CAC scoring. Although some studies have identified the predictive factors of the presence of NCP in patients with zero CACS, those in Japanese patients with zero CACS have not been fully elucidated.

The aim of this study is to identify the factors that can predict the presence and number of NCPs in Japanese patients with zero CACS using 64-slice MDCT.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Population

Between March 2009 and March 2011, 586 consecutive Japanese patients underwent 64-slice cardiac CT (both CAC scoring and CTCA) for suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) at our hospital. We excluded patients with known CAD or previous myocardial infarction, those with a history of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and those with unacceptable CTCA image quality. Among the remaining 353 patients, we enrolled 111 (31%) with zero CACS. This study was approved by our institutional review board, and all patients provided written informed consent to participate.

2.2. Cardiac CT Scanning Protocol

The patients were evaluated by cardiac CT scanning using a 64-slice MDCT (Aquillion 64, Toshiba Medical Systems, Tochigi, Japan). Before scanning, blood pressure and heart rate were measured, sublingual nitroglycerin was administered to all of the patients, and those with an initial heart rate above 65 beats per minute were administered with beta-blockers in the absence of contraindications. Thereafter, unenhanced electrocardiographically gated CT images were acquired to calculate CACS before CTCA, which were prospectively triggered at 75% of the RR interval and obtained under the following parameters: collimation, 4 × 3.0 mm; gantry rotation time, 0.25 sec; tube voltage, 120 kV; and tube current, 300 mA.

The CTCA scans were acquired as follows. Patients received an intravenous bolus of 0.9 mL/kg (body weight) of contrast media (Iopamiron 370 mg I/mL; Bayer HealthCare, Osaka, Japan) at a rate of 2.5 - 4.5 mL/sec, followed by 30 mL of saline at the same rate using a double-head injector (Dual shot™, Nemoto Kyorindou, Tokyo, Japan). A region of interest was placed within the ascending aorta, and the scan was started when the CT density reached 100 Hounsfield Units (HU) above the baseline CT density. Images were acquired under the following parameters: collimation, 64 × 0.5 mm; gantry rotation time, 0.35, 0.375 or 0.4 sec; tube voltage, 120 kV; tube current, 400 mA; beam pitch, 0.175 to 0.2. Raw datasets of the scans were reconstructed using retrospective electrocardiogram-gated halfscan or segmental reconstruction algorithms. The optimal cardiac phase was individually determined to minimize motion artifacts.

The reconstructed data were transferred to a computer workstation (Volume Analyzer SYNAPSE VINCENT, FUJIFILM, Tokyo, Japan) for CAC scoring and NCP evaluation.

2.3. Cardiac CT Data Analysis

We calculated CACS using the Agatston scoring method [21] and patients with zero CACS were enrolled in this study. All CTCA images were interpreted by two experienced observers who were blinded to the clinical findings of the patients such as their characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors, clinical presentations and pretest probabilities. If the CTCA findings of the observers differed, consensus was reached and the final findings were determined. Coronary arteries were divided into 15 segments as proposed for the American Heart Association model [22], and we evaluated all segments with a diameter of > 2 mm. Using curved multiplanar reformation (c-MPR) and cross-sectional (CS) images, we detected NCPs as structures of > 1 mm³ that could be assigned to the coronary artery walls with CT values below the contrast-enhanced coronary lumen but above the surrounding connective tissue, as previously described [23,24]. We then assessed the number of segments with NCP for each patient. Each NCP was characterized for remodeling index (RI), minimum CT value and the presence of spotty calcification (SC) and significant stenosis. We calculated RI from CS images as lesion vessel area/reference vessel area defined as the average of apparently normal proximal and distal vessel areas to the lesion. Positive remodeling (PR) was defined as RI > 1.1. At least 5 regions of interest were placed within each NCP, and the lowest value of those was defined as the minimum CT value. We defined NCP with a minimum CT value of < 0 HU as low CT value plaque (LP). We assessed the presence of NCPs with both PR and LP which might be associated with the subsequent development of ACS. We defined SC as being < 3 mm in size on c-MPR images and occupying only one side on CS images as described [7]. Stenosis was deemed significant when luminal diameter narrowing was ≥ 50%.

2.4. Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Pretest Probability

We assessed whether patients had the following cardiovascular risk factors based on their medical records: diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, dyslipidemia and current smoking. DM was defined as fasting glucose ≥ 126 mg/dL and hemoglobin A1c ≥ 6.5% or the use of antidiabetic treatment. Hypertension was defined as systemic blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mmHg or the use of antihypertensive treatment. Dyslipidemia was defined as total cholesterol ≥ 220 mg/dL, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥ 140 mg/dL, fasting triglycerides ≥ 150 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≤ 40 mg/dL or the use of lipid-lowering treatment. Medicines administered at the time of CT imaging were also recorded. The pretest likelihood of CAD was determined based on Morise scores as low (< 9), intermediate (9 to15) or high (> 15) [25].

2.5. Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables are expressed as means ± standard deviation (SD). Categorical variables are presented as absolute numbers and relative frequencies (%). The Chisquare test was used in univariate analyses for categorycal variables and Student’s unpaired t test was applied for continuous variables. Predictors of the presence of NCP, NCP with both PR and LP and ≥ 2 NCPs were assessed using multiple logistic regression analyses, and independent predictors of the number of segments with NCP were determined using multiple linear regression analysis. The diagnostic performance of the presence of NCP and ≥ 2 NCPs was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. Cut off values were also calculated. All tests of significance were two-tailed and values of P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed using Ekuseru-Toukei 2010 (Social Survey Research Information Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan).

3. Results

Table 1 shows the baseline characteristics of the enrolled patients. Over half had hypertension, dyslipidemia or chest symptoms, most (66%) had an intermediate pretest probability of CAD, and almost all (93%) had an intermediate or high pretest probability. Most patients were not given any medications for CAD at the time of CT imaging.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	P. Greenland, R. O. Bonow, B. H. Brundage, M. J. Budoff, M. J. Eisenberg, S. M. Grundy, et al., “ACCF/ AHA 2007 Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring by Computed Tomography in Global Cardiovascular Risk Assessment and in Evaluation of Patients With Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force (ACCF/AHA Writing Committee to Update the 2000 Expert Consensus Document on Electron Beam Computed Tomography) Developed in Collaboration With the Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 49, No. 3, 2007, pp. 378-402. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2006.10.001
[2]	A. Sarwar, L. J. Shaw, M. D. Shapiro, R. Blankstein, U. Hoffmann, R. C. Cury, et al., “Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Absence of Coronary Artery Calcification,” JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 2, No. 6, 2009, pp. 675-688. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2008.12.031
[3]	G. Pundziute, J. D. Schuijf, J. W. Jukema, E. Boersma, A. de Roos, E. E. van der Wall, et al., “Prognostic Value of Multislice Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography in Patients With Known or Suspected Coronary Artery Disease,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 49, No. 1, 2007, pp. 62-70. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2006.07.070
[4]	V. Russo, A. Zavalloni, M. L. Bacchi Reggiani, K. Buttazzi, V. Gostoli, S. Bartolini, et al., “Incremental Prognostic Value of Coronary CT Angiography in Patients With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease,” Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 3, 2010, pp. 351-359. doi:10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.109.880625
[5]	M. Hadamitzky, R. Distler, T. Meyer, F. Hein, A. Kastrati, S. Martinoff, et al., “Prognostic Value of Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography in Comparison With Calcium Scoring and Clinical Risk Scores,” Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 4, 2011, pp. 16-23. doi:10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.110.955351
[6]	C. F. de Azevedo, M. S. Hadlich, S. G. Bezerra, J. L. Petriz, R. R. Alves, O. de Souza, et al., “Prognostic Value of CT Angiography in Patients With Inconclusive Functional Stress Tests,” JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 4, No. 7, 2011, pp. 740-751. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2011.02.017
[7]	S. Motoyama, M. Sarai, H. Harigaya, H. Anno, K. Inoue, T. Hara, et al., “Computed Tomographic Angiography Characteristics of Atherosclerotic Plaques Subsequently Resulting in Acute Coronary Syndrome,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2009, pp. 49-57. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.02.068
[8]	J. L. Kelly, D. Thickman, S. D. Abramson, P. R. Chen, S. F. Smazal, M. J. Fleishman, et al., “Coronary CT Angiography Findings in Patients Without Coronary Calcification,” American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 191, No. 1, 2008, pp. 50-55. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.2954
[9]	I. Gottlieb, J. M. Miller, A. Arbab-Zadeh, M. Dewey, M. E. Clouse, L. Sara, et al., “The Absence of Coronary Calcification Does Not Exclude Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease or the Need for Revascularization in Patients Referred for Conventional Coronary Angiography,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 55, No. 7, 2010, pp. 627-634. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.07.072
[10]	M. Alqarqaz, M. Zaidan and M. H. Al-Mallah, “Prevalence and Predictors of Atherosclerosis in Symptomatic Patients With Zero Calcium Score”, Academic Radiology, Vol. 18, No. 11, 2011, pp. 1437-1441. doi:10.1016/j.acra.2011.07.012
[11]	H. Ueda, K. Harimoto, S. Tomoyama, H. Tamaru, M. Miyawaki, N. Mitsusada, et al., “Association between Cardiovascular Risk Factors and the Presence of Coronary Plaque in a Zero or Low Coronary Artery Calcium Score,” International Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 147, No. 3, 2011, pp. 475-477. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.01.026
[12]	T. C. Villines, E. A. Hulten, L. J. Shaw, M. Goyal, A. Dunning, S. Achenbach, et al., “Prevalence and Severity of Coronary Artery Disease and Adverse Events Among Symptomatic Patients With Coronary Artery Calcification Scores of Zero Undergoing Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: Results From the CONFIRM (Coronary CT Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: An International Multicenter) Registry,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 58, No. 24, 2011, pp. 2533-2540. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.10.851
[13]	D. H. Yoo, E. J. Chun, S. I. Choi, J. A. Kim, K. N. Jin, T. J. Yeon, et al., “Significance of Noncalcified Coronary Plaque in Asymptomatic Subjects With Low Coronary Artery Calcium Score: Assessment With Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography,” International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2011, pp. 27-35. doi:10.1007/s10554-011-9968-1
[14]	E. Ergün, P. Kosar, C. Oztürk, E. Basbay, F. Koc and U. Kosar, “Prevalence and Extent of Coronary Artery Disease Determined by 64-Slice CTA in Patients With Zero Coronary Calcium Score,” International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2011, pp. 451-458. doi:10.1007/s10554-010-9681-5
[15]	S. Uretsky, A. Rozanski, P. Singh, A. Supariwala, P. Atluri, S. Bangalore, et al., “The Presence, Characterization and Prognosis of Coronary Plaques Among Patients With Zero Coronary Calcium Scores,” International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 27, No. 6, 2011, pp. 805-812. doi:10.1007/s10554-010-9730-0
[16]	Y. E. Yoon, S. A. Chang, S. I. Choi, E. J. Chun, Y. S. Cho, T. J. Youn, et al., “The Absence of Coronary Artery Calcification Does Not Rule Out the Presence of Significant Coronary Artery Disease in Asian Patients With Acute Chest Pain,” International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2012, pp. 389-398. doi:10.1007/s10554-011-9819-0
[17]	H. Ueda, K. Harimoto, S. Tomoyama, H. Tamaru, M. Miyawaki, N. Mitsusada, et al., “Relation of Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Angina Status to Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease According to Categorical Coronary Artery Calcium Score,” Heart Vessels, Vol. 27, No. 2, 2012, pp. 128-134. doi:10.1007/s00380-011-0128-2
[18]	C. K. Chen, Y. S. Kuo, C. A. Liu, M. H. Sheu, H. T. Chang, C. W. Chen, et al., “Frequency and Risk Factors Associated With Atherosclerotic Plaques in Patients With a Zero Coronary Artery Calcium Score,” Journal of the Chinese Medical Association, Vol. 75, No. 1, 2012, pp. 10-15. doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2011.11.001
[19]	H. Morita, S. Fujimoto, T. Kondo, T. Arai, T. Sekine, H. Matsutani, et al., “Prevalence of Computed Tomographic Angiography-Verified High-Risk Plaques and Significant Luminal Stenosis in Patients With Zero Coronary Calcium Score,” International Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 158, No. 2, 2012, pp. 272-278. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.02.052
[20]	Y. J. Kim, J. Hur, H. J. Lee, H. J. Chang, J. E. Nam, Y. J. Hong, et al., “Meaning of Zero Coronary Calcium Score in Symptomatic Patients Referred for Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography,” European Heart Journal: Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 13, No. 9, 2012, pp. 776-785. doi:10.1093/ehjci/jes060
[21]	A. S. Agatston, W. R. Janowitz, F. J. Hildner, N. R. Zusmer, M. Viamonte Jr. and R. Detrano, “Quantification of Coronary Artery Calcium Using Ultrafast Computed Tomography,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology , Vol. 15, No. 4, 1990, pp. 827-832. doi:10.1016/0735-1097(90)90282-T
[22]	W. G. Austen, J. E. Edwards, R. L. Frye, G. G. Gensini, V. L. Gott, L. S. Griffith, et al., “A Reporting System on Patients Evaluated for Coronary Artery Disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association,” Circulation, Vol. 51, 1975, pp. 5-40. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.51.4.5
[23]	A. W. Leber, A. Knez, A. Becker, C. Becker, F. von Ziegler, K. Nikolaou, et al., “Accuracy of Multidetector Spiral Computed Tomography in Identifying and Differentiating the Composition of Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaques: A Comparative Study With Intracoronary Ultrasound,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 43, No. 7, 2004, pp. 1241-1247. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2003.10.059
[24]	S. Achenbach, F. Moselewski, D. Ropers, M. Ferencik, U. Hoffmann, B. MacNeill, et al., “Detection of Calcified and Noncalcified Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaque by Contrast-Enhanced, Submillimeter Multidetector Spiral Computed Tomography: A Segment-Based Comparison with Intravascular Ultrasound,” Circulation, Vol. 109, 2004, pp. 14-17. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000111517.69230.0F
[25]	A. P. Morise, W. J. Haddad and D. Beckner, “Development and Validation of a Clinical Score to Estimate the Probability of Coronary Artery Disease in Men and Women Presenting With Suspected Coronary Disease,” American Journal of Medicine, Vol. 102, No. 4, 1997, pp. 350-356. doi:10.1016/S0002-9343(97)00086-7
[26]	K. Akram, R. E. O'Donnell, S. King, H. R. Superko, A. Agatston and S. Voros, “Influence of Symptomatic Status on the Prevalence of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Zero Calcium Score,” Atherosclerosis, Vol. 203, No. 2, 2009, pp. 533-537. doi:10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2008.07.008
[27]	M. Marwan, D. Ropers, T. Pflederer, W. G. Daniel and S. Achenbach, “Clinical Characteristics of Patients with Obstructive Coronary Lesions in the Absence of Coronary Calcification: An Evaluation by Coronary CT Angiography,” Heart, Vol. 95, 2009, pp. 1056-1060. doi:10.1136/hrt.2008.153353
[28]	A. Knez, A. Becker, A. Leber, C. White, C. R. Becker, M. F. Reiser, et al., “Relation of Coronary Calcium Scores by Electron Beam Tomography to Obstructive Disease in 2,115 Symptomatic Patients,” American Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 93, No. 9, 2004, pp. 1150-1152. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.01.044
[29]	A. Becker, A. Leber, C. W. White, C. Becker, M. F. Reiser and A. Knez, “Multislice Computed Tomography for Determination of Coronary Artery Disease in a Symptomatic Patient Population,” International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 23, No. 3, 2007, pp. 361-367. doi:10.1007/s10554-006-9189-1
[30]	F. Y. Lin, L. J. Shaw, A. M. Dunning, T. M. Labounty, J. H. Choi, J. W. Weinsaft, et al., “Mortality Risk in Symptomatic Patients With Nonobstructive Coronary Artery Disease: A Prospective 2-Center Study of 2,583 Patients Undergoing 64-Detector Row Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology , Vol. 58, No. 5, 2011, pp. 510-519. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2010.11.078
[31]	J. W. McEvoy, M. J. Blaha, J. J. Rivera, M. J. Budoff, A. N. Khan, L. J. Shaw, et al., “Mortality Rates in Smokers and Nonsmokers in the Presence or Absence of Coronary Artery Calcification,” JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, Vol. 5, No. 10, 2012, pp. 1037-1045. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.02.017
[32]	J. Hausleiter, T. Meyer, F. Hermann, M. Hadamitzky, M. Krebs, T. C. Gerber, et al., “Estimated Radiation Dose Associated With Cardiac CT Angiography,” JAMA, Vol. 301, No. 5, 2009, pp. 500-507. doi:10.1001/jama.2009.54
[33]	J. Leipsic, T. M. Labounty, B. Heilbron, J. K. Min, G. B. Mancini, F. Y. Lin, et al., “Estimated Radiation Dose Reduction Using Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction in Coronary CT Angiography: The ERASIR Study,” American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 195, No. 3, 2010, pp. 655-660. doi:10.2214/AJR.10.4288
[34]	S. S. Halliburton, S. Abbara, M. Y. Chen, R. Gentry, M. Mahesh, G. L. Raff, et al., “SCCT Guidelines on Radiation Dose and Dose-Optimization Strategies in Cardiovascular CT,” Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2011, pp. 198-224. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2011.06.001