Background: Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) assessment post-heart transplantation (HT) typically relies on invasive coronary angiography (ICA). However, cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is emerging as a promising alternative due to its potential benefits in economic, safety, and logistical aspects. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a CCTA program on these aspects in CAV surveillance post-HT. Methods: A retrospective single-center study was conducted between March 2021 and February 2023, involving HT patients who underwent either CCTA or ICA. Results: Among 260 patients undergoing CAV surveillance, 115 (44.2%) patients underwent CCTA, and 145 (55.8%) patients underwent ICA. The CCTA group showed incurred lower overall costs (p ​< ​0.0001) and shorter hospitalization times (p ​< ​0.0001) compared to the ICA group. In terms of safety, CCTA surveillance required significantly lower contrast volumes (p ​< ​0.0001) and lower effective doses (p ​= ​0.03). Conclusion: CCTA emerges as a safe and cost-effective non-invasive alternative for CAV surveillance post-HT, outperforming ICA in terms of safety, logistical aspects, and economic burden.

Redefining CAV surveillance strategies: Benefits of CCTA vs. ICA

Pradegan, Nicola;Tessari, Chiara;Angelini, Annalisa;Tarantini, Giuseppe;Tona, Francesco;Iliceto, Sabino;Gerosa, Gino;Motta, Raffaella
2024

Abstract

Background: Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) assessment post-heart transplantation (HT) typically relies on invasive coronary angiography (ICA). However, cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is emerging as a promising alternative due to its potential benefits in economic, safety, and logistical aspects. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a CCTA program on these aspects in CAV surveillance post-HT. Methods: A retrospective single-center study was conducted between March 2021 and February 2023, involving HT patients who underwent either CCTA or ICA. Results: Among 260 patients undergoing CAV surveillance, 115 (44.2%) patients underwent CCTA, and 145 (55.8%) patients underwent ICA. The CCTA group showed incurred lower overall costs (p ​< ​0.0001) and shorter hospitalization times (p ​< ​0.0001) compared to the ICA group. In terms of safety, CCTA surveillance required significantly lower contrast volumes (p ​< ​0.0001) and lower effective doses (p ​= ​0.03). Conclusion: CCTA emerges as a safe and cost-effective non-invasive alternative for CAV surveillance post-HT, outperforming ICA in terms of safety, logistical aspects, and economic burden.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11577/3530460
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
  • OpenAlex ND
social impact