Ultra-low-dose dual-source CT coronary angiography with high pitch: diagnostic yield of a volumetric planning scan and effects on dose reduction and imaging strategy

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the role of an ultra-low-dose dual-source CT coronary angiography (CTCA) scan with high pitch for delimiting the range of the subsequent standard CTCA scan. METHODS 30 patients with an indication for CTCA were prospectively examined using a two-scan dual-source CTCA protocol (2.0 × 64.0 × 0.6 mm; pitch, 3.4; rotation time of 280 ms; 100 kV): Scan 1 was acquired with one-fifth of the tube current suggested by the automatic exposure control software [CareDose 4D™ (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) using 100 kV and 370 mAs as a reference] with the scan length from the tracheal bifurcation to the diaphragmatic border. Scan 2 was acquired with standard tube current extending with reduced scan length based on Scan 1. Nine central coronary artery segments were analysed qualitatively on both scans. RESULTS Scan 2 (105.1 ± 10.1 mm) was significantly shorter than Scan 1 (127.0 ± 8.7 mm). Image quality scores were significantly better for Scan 2. However, in 5 of 6 (83%) patients with stenotic coronary artery disease, a stenosis was already detected in Scan 1 and in 13 of 24 (54%) patients with non-stenotic coronary arteries, a stenosis was already excluded by Scan 1. Using Scan 2 as reference, the positive- and negative-predictive value of Scan 1 was 83% (5 of 6 patients) and 100% (13 of 13 patients), respectively. CONCLUSION An ultra-low-dose CTCA planning scan enables a reliable scan length reduction of the following standard CTCA scan and allows for correct diagnosis in a substantial proportion of patients. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE Further dose reductions are possible owing to a change in the individual patient's imaging strategy as a prior ultra-low-dose CTCA scan may already rule out the presence of a stenosis or may lead to a direct transferal to an invasive catheter procedure.

Diagnostic value of immunoassays for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Immunoassays are essential in the workup of patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. However, the diagnostic accuracy is uncertain with regard to different classes of assays, antibody specificities, thresholds, test variations, and manufacturers. We aimed to assess diagnostic accuracy measures of available immunoassays and to explore sources of heterogeneity. We performed comprehensive literature searches and applied strict inclusion criteria. Finally, 49 publications comprising 128 test evaluations in 15 199 patients were included in the analysis. Methodological quality according to the revised tool for quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies was moderate. Diagnostic accuracy measures were calculated with the unified model (comprising a bivariate random-effects model and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics model). Important differences were observed between classes of immunoassays, type of antibody specificity, thresholds, application of confirmation step, and manufacturers. Combination of high sensitivity (>95%) and high specificity (>90%) was found in 5 tests only: polyspecific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with intermediate threshold (Genetic Testing Institute, Asserachrom), particle gel immunoassay, lateral flow immunoassay, polyspecific chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) with a high threshold, and immunoglobulin G (IgG)-specific CLIA with low threshold. Borderline results (sensitivity, 99.6%; specificity, 89.9%) were observed for IgG-specific Genetic Testing Institute-ELISA with low threshold. Diagnostic accuracy appears to be inadequate in tests with high thresholds (ELISA; IgG-specific CLIA), combination of IgG specificity and intermediate thresholds (ELISA, CLIA), high-dose heparin confirmation step (ELISA), and particle immunofiltration assay. When making treatment decisions, clinicians should be a aware of diagnostic characteristics of the tests used and it is recommended they estimate posttest probabilities according to likelihood ratios as well as pretest probabilities using clinical scoring tools.

Older patients with low Charlson score and high-risk prostate cancer benefit from radical prostatectomy

INTRODUCTION The aim of the study was to identify the appropriate level of Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) in older patients (>70 years) with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) to achieve survival benefit following radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 1008 older patients (>70 years) who underwent RP with pelvic lymph node dissection for high-risk prostate cancer (preoperative prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/mL or clinical stage ≥T2c or Gleason ≥8) from 14 tertiary institutions between 1988 and 2014. The study population was further grouped into CCI < 2 and ≥2 for analysis. Survival rate for each group was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method and competitive risk Fine-Gray regression to estimate the best explanatory multivariable model. Area under the curve (AUC) and Akaike information criterion were used to identify ideal 'Cut off' for CCI. RESULTS The clinical and cancer characteristics were similar between the two groups. Comparison of the survival analysis using the Kaplan-Meier curve between two groups for non-cancer death and survival estimations for 5 and 10 years shows significant worst outcomes for patients with CCI ≥ 2. In multivariate model to decide the appropriate CCI cut-off point, we found CCI 2 has better AUC and p value in log rank test. CONCLUSION Older patients with fewer comorbidities harboring high-risk PCa appears to benefit from RP. Sicker patients are more likely to die due to non-prostate cancer-related causes and are less likely to benefit from RP.