A new look at 3D heart imaging: a non-invasive way to reveal cardiac disease still errs, but is improving fast
Categories: Medical ImagingTechnology in wide use to conjure up detailed snapshots of a beating heart can mislead doctors and unnecessarily frighten patients, according to new research led by Cleveland Clinic imaging expert Mario J. Garcia, M.D.
A growing number of his patients fall prey to a fairly common glitch in many of the devices: false positives. That means results from a scan point to heart disease even though the patient is fine–although often poorer by the hundreds of dollars it cost to get the faulty test.
“They see an ad on TV, pay a lot for someone to run a CT scan, and are told that something doesn’t look right,” says Dr. Garcia, director of cardiac imaging at Cleveland Clinic. “They come to us distressed, and in some cases, we have to repeat multiple tests to demonstrate that they’re okay.” His new research casts light on why scanners make mistakes (July 26 2006 Journal of the American Medical Association). It raises warning flags for anyone considering buying cardiac evaluations after watching a commercial.
But despite his findings, Dr. Garcia predicts that the newest versions of the diagnostic equipment, called MDCT (for Multidetector Computed Tomography), are likely to play a greater role in diagnosing heart attacks and other cardiovascular afflictions. You can expect that MDCT will increasingly compete with the current gold standard for revealing arterial narrowing and heart attack. As the most advanced equipment comes into wider use, getting a good diagnosis will be simpler and faster for many patients, maybe you (see “A Comparatively Easy Way to Diagnose Heart Disease,” left). Already, MDCT–even earlier versions of it–is producing an impressive record of telling scared but healthy patients that in fact they don’t have heart disease.
Alternative to a gold standard
For now, the main route to an accurate diagnosis often leads to the catheterization laboratory for an invasive procedure called cardiac angiography. Doctors thread a thin tube (catheter) up from a groin artery to the top of the heart. As they watch two-dimensional X-ray images on a screen over the cath lab table, they inject X-ray contrast dye into the heart arteries–it shows up black on the screen–and watch it course rapidly toward heart muscle. Blockages show up as narrowing in the arteries on the screen, like the pinched midsection of an hourglass.
CT scans also require contrast dye, but it’s injected through an intravenous (IV) line into an arm vein instead of directly into the heart arteries. An earlier generation of diagnostic devices, called electron beam CT (EBCT) scanners, provided a stack of heart images like slices of raisin bread. One slice would reveal a little of the raisin, the next would show a little more, until doctors had enough slices to represent the entire raisin. “Those slices are relatively thick,” Dr. Garcia says, “and that’s why EBCT hasn’t panned out to be as accurate as the MDCT test.”
The newest MDCT scans create thinner slices, up to 64 of them with each pass of the X-ray camera over a portion of your chest. So they can provide a sharper 3D image of the whole “loaf”–the entire heart–at once (see an example, above).
EBCT focused primarily on detecting calcium, a component of the plaque that builds up in arterial walls. Plaque rupture sets the stage for heart attacks. By comparison, the latest scanners are the medical version of superheroes. They still scout for calcium. They can also generate detailed pictures of plaque without calcium, which may be more prone to rupture, Dr. Garcia says. MDCT’s X-ray vision can probe your heart muscle and soft tissue, and bring arterial narrowing into bold relief.
“MDCT has at least the potential to look at three bad causes of chest pain all at once,” says Deepak L. Bhatt, M.D., associate director, Cleveland Clinic Cardiovascular Coordinating Center.
“Depending on how you set up the scanner, you can open different windows into the chest,” he says. “You can set the windows to optimize the view of the heart arteries” for what doctors call a CT angio–non-invasive angiography. “You can get pictures of the aorta, the body’s main artery, leading up from the top of the heart, to see if there’s a tear in its wall, or examine blood vessels to the lungs to see if there’s a blood clot.”
In some cases, MDCT has inadvertently helped doctors find other diseases in the chest, like lung cancer.
What’s wrong with this picture?
If it’s so easy, why hasn’t non-invasive CT angio replaced the more cumbersome angiography test? The reason is that many of the scanners in use today don’t provide the clarity of the newest 64-slice equipment. The problem of false positives, revealed in Dr. Garcia’s recent research, appeared in older MDCT equipment producing just 16 slices.
In his study, he tested their accuracy at 11 different sites. A total of 187 patients underwent MDCT. Then–within one to 14 days–each went to the cath lab for conventional angiography for comparison.