Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of included study characteristics

From: A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in the investigation of suspected coronary artery disease

Author (Year)

Type of scanner

Participants analysed (n)

Mean age (years)

Gender (M/F)

Prevalence of CAD (%)

Mean heart rate (± SD) (bpm)

Level of analysis presented in publication

 

Patient

Vessel

Segment

Level II diagnostic studies

Brodoefel et al (2008) [8]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

102

62.0

82/20

62.7

68.2 ± 13.3

No

No

Yes

Cademartiri et al (2008a) [13]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

170

57.5 a

124/46

NR

62.7 ± 10.5

No

No

Yes

Ghostine et al (2008) [14]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

93

65.0

61/32

46.0

73.0 ± 14.0

Yes

No

Yes

Husmann et al (2008) [15]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

88

64.3

48/40

48.9

63.0 ± 9.2

Yes

Yes

Yes

Leber et al (2007) [16]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

90

58.0

57/33

47.7

73.0 ± NR

Yes

No

Yes

Leschka et al (2008a) [17]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

74

61.7

50/24

47.3

67.7 ± 13.3

Yes

Yes

Yes

Leschka et al (2008b) [18]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

114

62.2

73/41

62.3

68.0 ± 13.0

Yes

No

Yes

Rixe et al (2009) [19]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

76

65.5

47/29

52.6

68.0 ± 9.0

Yes

Yes

Yes

Shabestari et al (2007) [20]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

138

63.0

103/35

78.3

65.0 ± NR b

Yes

Yes

Yes

Level III-1 diagnostic studies

Achenbach et al (2008) [21]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens Germany

200

63.0

114/86

44.5

76 ± 13

Yes

Yes

Yes

Budoff et al (2008) [22]

Lightspeed VCT Scanner, GE Healthcare

230

57.0

136/94

24.8

60 ± 12

Yes

Yes

No

Cademartiri et al (2007) [23]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

72

53.9

38/34

28.0

70.0 ± 9.9

Yes

Yes

Yes

Hausleiter et al (2007) [24]

Somatom Sensation 64 Cardiac, Siemens, Germany

243

62.0

158 c/85

42.0

56.6 ± 6.5

Yes

Yes

Yes

Herzog et al (2007) [25]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

55

67.0

29/26

34.5

64.0 ± NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

Meijboom et al (2007a) [26]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

104

58.7 a

75/29

85.0

66.0 ± 9.0

Yes

Yes

Yes

Meijboom et al (2007b) [27]

Somatom Sensation 64; Siemens, Germany

402

59.2 a

279/123

62.9

59.5 a ± NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

Meijboom et al (2007c) [28]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

254

59.0 a

171/83

49.6

59.3 a ± NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

Meijboom et al (2008) [12]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany; Brilliance 64, Philips, The Netherlands; Toshiba Multi-Slice Aquilion 64, Toshiba, Japan

360

60.0

245/115

68.0

59 ± 9

Yes

Yes

Yes

Oncel et al (2007) [29]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

80

56.0

61/19

77.5

58.0 ± 10.0

Yes

No

Yes

Piers et al (2008) [30]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

60

64.0

51/9

63.3

63.0 ± 12.0

Yes

Yes

Yes

Scheffel et al (2008) [31]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

120

68.2

71/49

55.0

59.0 ± 6.0

Yes

Yes

Yes

Schlosser et al (2007) [32]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

61

62.4

41/20

NR

57.0 ± 4.0

No

Yes

Yes

Sheth et al (2008) [33]

Toshiba Aquilion 64-detector scanner, Toshiba, Japan

80

56.0

43/37

39.5

NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

Weustink et al (2007) [34]

DSCT Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany.

100

61.0

79/21

77.0

68.0 ± 11.0

Yes

Yes

Yes

Level III-2 diagnostic studies

Cademartiri et al (2008b) [35]

Somatom Sensation 64 Cardiac; Siemens, Germany

134

63.4

98/36

62.7

57.5 a ± NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

Han et al (2008) [36]

64-slice VCT; GE Healthcare

53

59.6

228 d/175

81.1

NR

No

No

Yes

Pugliese et al (2008) [37]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

51

59.0

39/12

74.5

58.0 ± 7.0

Yes

No

Yes

Yoshida et al (2009) [38]

Somatom Sensation 64, Siemens, Germany

70

64.0

50/20

NR

65.0 ± 11.0

No

No

Yes

  1. Bpm, beats-per-minute; CAD, coronary artery disease; F, female; M, male; NR, not reported.
  2. Levels of evidence were defined according to the NHMRC diagnostic levels of evidence (11)
  3. a Calculated post hoc using a crude weighted average of the two reported sub-groups
  4. b Median heart rate
  5. c There was a discrepancy between the number stated in Table 1 of the publication and the number stated in the text (228 and 226, respectively).
  6. d For all enrolled patients in study