Coronary MDCTA With Iopamidol Injection 370

For all technically adequate coronary artery segments, each reader was to assess whether each segment was visualized to a quality that was adequate for accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of stenosis. An adequate quality for the accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of coronary artery stenosis was comprised of 2 basic features: 1) no more than mild blurring of the spatial distinction between the vessel wall and lumen, and 2) a readily visible distinction in image contrast between calcified plaque, enhanced vessel lumen, and uncalcified vessel wall or plaque.

For all technically adequate coronary artery segments, each reader was to assess whether each segment was visualized to a quality that was adequate for accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of stenosis. An adequate quality for the accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of coronary artery stenosis was comprised of 2 basic features: 1) no more than mild blurring of the spatial distinction between the vessel wall and lumen, and 2) a readily visible distinction in image contrast between calcified plaque, enhanced vessel lumen, and uncalcified vessel wall or plaque.

For all technically adequate coronary artery segments, each reader was to assess whether each segment was visualized to a quality that was adequate for accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of stenosis. An adequate quality for the accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of coronary artery stenosis was comprised of 2 basic features: 1) no more than mild blurring of the spatial distinction between the vessel wall and lumen, and 2) a readily visible distinction in image contrast between calcified plaque, enhanced vessel lumen, and uncalcified vessel wall or plaque.

For this assessment, each off-site reader was to place regions of interest (ROIs) into the lumens of the mid-portion of the left main coronary artery (LM) (segment number 5), and into the mid-portion of segment number 1 of the right coronary artery (RCA). The mean Hounsfield Units levels and standard deviations (SD) for those 2 ROIs were to be recorded by the reader.

For this assessment, each off-site reader was to place regions of interest (ROIs) into the lumens of the mid-portion of the left main coronary artery (LM) (segment number 5), and into the mid-portion of segment number 1 of the right coronary artery (RCA). The mean Hounsfield Units levels and standard deviations (SD) for those 2 ROIs were to be recorded by the reader.

For this assessment, each off-site reader was to place regions of interest (ROIs) into the lumens of the mid-portion of the left main coronary artery (LM) (segment number 5), and into the mid-portion of segment number 1 of the right coronary artery (RCA). The mean Hounsfield Units levels and standard deviations (SD) for those 2 ROIs were to be recorded by the reader.

For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of sensitivity [TP/(TP+FN)] is presented.

For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of specificity [TN/(TN+FP)] is presented.

For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of sensitivity [TP/(TP+FN)] is presented.

For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of specificity [TN/(TN+FP)] is presented.

For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of sensitivity [TP/(TP+FN)] is presented.

For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of specificity [TN/(TN+FP)] is presented.

Participants who received investigational product (iopamidol injection) and experienced an adverse event (AE). See Adverse Events module for further details.