Description/Background
Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) is a noninvasive imaging study that uses intravenously administered contrast material and high-resolution, rapid imaging computed tomography (CT).^22,23

Stable patients without known CAD fall into 2 categories:^1,2,4

• Asymptomatic, for whom global risk of CAD events can be determined from coronary risk factors, using calculators available online (see Risk Calculators in the Overview section).
• Symptomatic, for whom we estimate the pretest probability that their chest-related symptoms are due to clinically significant CAD.

Three Types of Chest Pain or Discomfort:

• Typical angina (definite) is defined as including ALL 3 characteristics:
  • Substernal chest pain or discomfort with characteristic quality and duration
  • Provoked by exertion or emotional stress
  • Relieved by rest and/or nitroglycerin
• Atypical angina (probable) has only 2 of the above characteristics.
• Nonanginal chest pain/discomfort has only 0 – 1 of the above characteristics.
• Once the type of chest pain has been established from the medical record, the pretest probability of significant CAD is estimated from the Diamond Forrester Table below, recognizing that additional coronary risk factors could increase pretest probability.⁴

Diamond Forrester Table

o    Very Low: < 5% pretest probability of CAD
o    Low: 5% – 10% pretest probability of CAD
o    Intermediate: 10% – 90% pretest probability of CAD
o    High: > 90% pretest probability of CAD
 

General Information

It is an expectation that all patients receive care/services from a licensed clinician. All appropriate supporting documentation, including recent pertinent office visit notes, laboratory data, and results of any special testing must be provided. If applicable: All prior relevant imaging results and the reason that alternative imaging cannot be performed must be included in the documentation submitted.

Where a specific clinical indication is not directly addressed in this guideline, medical necessity determination will be made based on widely accepted standard of care criteria. These criteria are supported by evidence-based or peer-reviewed sources such as medical literature, societal guidelines and state/national recommendations.
 

Policy
INDICATIONS FOR CORONARY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY (CCTA)^1,2,3,4
Evaluation in Suspected Coronary Artery Disease (CAD)^5,6,7,8

• Intermediate and high pretest probability patients⁹
• Low pretest probability patients should be considered for exercise treadmill test (ETT) unless other criteria for CCTA are met
• Symptomatic patients with prior PCI (stents > 3mm) or CABG history
• Exercise ECG stress test with intermediate Duke Treadmill (-10 to +4)
• Equivocal, borderline, or discordant stress imaging evaluation with continued symptoms concerning for CAD
• Repeat testing in patient with new or worsening symptoms since prior normal stress imaging^3,4
• Asymptomatic patients without known CAD
  • Previously unevaluated ECG evidence of possible myocardial ischemia including ischemic ST segment or T wave abnormalities (see overview section)
  • Previously unevaluated pathologic Q waves (see overview section)
  • Previously unevaluated left bundle branch block
• Newly diagnosed clinical systolic heart failure or diastolic heart failure, with reasonable suspicion of cardiac ischemia (prior events, risk factors), unless invasive coronary angiography is planned (SE diversion not required)^3,4,10,11,12
• Before valve surgery or transcatheter intervention as an alternative to coronary angiography^13,14,15
• To establish the etiology of mitral regurgitation¹⁵
• Evaluation of coronary anomaly or aneurysm^16,17,18,19
  • Evaluation prior to planned repair
  • Evaluation due to change in clinical status and/or new concerning signs or symptoms
  • Kawasaki disease and MIS-C follow up — for medium sized or greater aneurysms²⁰ periodic surveillance can be considered every 2 – 5 years. Once aneurysmal size has reduced to small aneurysms, surveillance can be performed every 3 – 5 years. No further surveillance once normalized.
• Evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts, to assess:^3,21
  • Patency and location when invasive coronary arteriography was either nondiagnostic or not performed
  • Location prior to cardiac or another chest surgery

Electrophysiologic Procedure Planning

• Evaluation of anatomy prior to radiofrequency ablation

OVERVIEW
The 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain has given a Class 1 recommendation with level of evidence of A for patients with stable and acute chest pain, who have no known coronary artery disease (CAD).⁹

Patient selection and contraindications to CCTA must be considered and may be inappropriate for the following:

• Known history of severe and/or anaphylactic contrast reaction
• Inability to cooperate with scan acquisition and/or breath-hold instructions
• Pregnancy
• Clinical instability (e.g., acute myocardial infarction, decompensated heart failure, severe hypotension)
• Renal impairment as defined by local protocols
• Image quality depends on keeping HR optimally < 60 bpm, a regular rhythm, limited coronary calcification, stents > 3.0 mm in diameter, ≥ 5 second breath hold, and vessels requiring imaging ≥ 1.5 mm diameter.²⁴

Scenarios that can additionally support a CCTA over a regular exercise treadmill test in the low probability scenario²⁵

Inability To Exercise

• Physical limitations precluding ability to exercise for at least 3 full minutes of Bruce protocol
• The patient has limited functional capacity (< 4 METS) such as ONE of the following:
  • Unable to take care of their activities of daily living (ADLs) or ambulate
  • Unable to walk 2 blocks on level ground
  • Unable to climb 1 flight of stairs
  • Unable to vacuum, dust, do dishes, sweep, or carry a small grocery bag

Other Comorbidities

• Prior cardiac surgery (coronary artery bypass graft or valvular)
• Left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 50%
• Severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with pulmonary function test (PFT) documentation, severe shortness of breath on minimal exertion, or requirement of home oxygen during the day
• Poorly controlled hypertension, with systolic blood pressure (BP) > 180 or Diastolic BP > 120

ECG and Echo-Related Baseline Findings

• Pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)
• Resting wall motion abnormalities on echocardiography
• Complete LBBB

Risk-Related

• Intermediate or high global risk in patients requiring type IC antiarrhythmic drugs
• Arrhythmia risk with exercise

ECG Stress Test Alone versus Stress Testing with Imaging
Prominent scenarios suitable for an ECG stress test WITHOUT imaging (i.e., exercise treadmill ECG test) require that the patient can exercise for at least 3 minutes of Bruce protocol with achievement of near maximal heart rate AND has an interpretable ECG for ischemia during exercise:⁴

• The (symptomatic) low pretest probability patient who can exercise and has an interpretable ECG4
• The patient who is under evaluation for exercise-induced arrhythmia
• The patient who requires an entrance stress test ECG for a cardiac rehab program or for an exercise prescription
• For the evaluation of syncope or presyncope during exertion²⁶

Duke Exercise ECG Treadmill Score27

Calculates risk from ECG treadmill alone:

• The equation for calculating the Duke treadmill score (DTS) is: DTS = exercise time in minutes - (5 x ST deviation in mm or 0.1 mV increments) - (4 x exercise angina score), with angina score being 0 = none, 1 = non-limiting, and 2 = exercise-limiting
• The score typically ranges from - 25 to + 15. These values correspond to low-risk (with a score of ≥ +5), intermediate risk (with scores ranging from -10 to +4), and high-risk (with a score of ≤ -11) categories

An uninterpretable baseline ECG includes1:

• ST segment depression of 1 mm or more (not for non-specific ST - T wave changes)
• Ischemic looking T wave inversions of at least 2.5 mm
• LVH with repolarization abnormalities, WPW, a ventricular paced rhythm, or left bundle branch block
• Digitalis use with associated ST - T abnormalities
• Resting HR under 50 bpm on a beta blocker and an anticipated suboptimal workload
• Note: RBBB with less than 1 mm ST depression at rest may be suitable for ECG treadmill testing
• Previously unevaluated pathologic Q waves (in two contiguous leads) defined as the following:
  • > 40 ms (1 mm) wide
  • > 2 mm deep
  • > 25% of depth of QRS complex

Global Risk of Cardiovascular Disease

Global risk of CAD is defined as the probability of manifesting cardiovascular disease over the next 10 years and refers to asymptomatic patients without known cardiovascular disease. It should be determined using one of the risk calculators below. A high risk is considered greater than a 20% risk of a cardiovascular event over the ensuing 10 years.

High global risk by itself generally lacks scientific support as an indication for stress imaging.⁵
 
There are rare exemptions, such as patients requiring IC antiarrhythmic drugs, who might require coronary risk stratification prior to initiation of the drug, when global risk is moderate or high.

• CAD Risk — Low 10-year absolute coronary or cardiovascular risk less than 10%
• CAD Risk — Moderate 10-year absolute coronary or cardiovascular risk between 10% and 20%
• CAD Risk — High  10-year absolute coronary or cardiovascular risk of greater than 20%

Websites for Global Cardiovascular Risk Calculators*

*Patients who have already manifested cardiovascular disease are already at high global risk and are not applicable to the calculators.^{28,29,30,31,32}

Definitions of Coronary Artery Disease^1,2,33,34,35

• Percentage stenosis refers to the reduction in diameter stenosis when angiography is the method and can be estimated or measured using angiography or more accurately measured with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).
• Coronary artery calcification is a marker of risk, as measured by Agatston score on coronary artery calcium imaging. It is not a diagnostic tool so much as it is a risk stratification tool. Its incorporation into global risk can be achieved by using the MESA risk calculator. 
• Stenoses ≥ 70% are considered obstructive coronary artery disease (also referred to as clinically significant), while stenoses ≤ 70% are considered non-obstructive coronary artery disease.33
• Ischemia-producing disease (also called hemodynamically or functionally significant disease, for which revascularization might be appropriate) generally implies at least one of the following:
  • Suggested by percentage diameter stenosis ≥ 70% by angiography; intermediate lesions are 50% – 69%³⁶
  • For a left main artery, suggested by a percentage stenosis ≥ 50% or minimum luminal cross-sectional area on IVUS ≤ 6 square mm^1,35,37
  • FFR (fractional flow reserve) ≤ 0.80 for a major vessel^35,37
  • iFR (instantaneous wave-free ratio) ≤ 0.89 for a major vessel^35,38,39,40
  • Demonstrable ischemic findings on stress testing (ECG or stress imaging), that are at least mild in degree
• A major vessel would be a coronary vessel that would be amenable to revascularization, if indicated. This assessment is made based on the diameter of the vessel and/or the extent of myocardial territory served by the vessel.
• FFR is the distal to proximal pressure ratio across a coronary lesion during maximal hyperemia induced by either intravenous or intracoronary adenosine. Less than or equal to 0.80 is considered a significant reduction in coronary flow.
• Newer technology that estimates FFR from CCTA images is covered under the separate NIA Guideline for FFR-CT.

Anginal Equivalent^1,26,41
Development of an anginal equivalent (e.g., shortness of breath, fatigue, or weakness) either with or without prior coronary revascularization should be based upon the documentation of reasons that symptoms other than chest discomfort are not due to other organ systems (e.g., dyspnea due to lung disease, fatigue due to anemia), by presentation of clinical data such as respiratory rate, oximetry, lung exam, etc. (as well as D-dimer, chest CT(A), and/or PFTs, when appropriate), and then incorporated into the evaluation of coronary artery disease as would chest discomfort. Syncope, per se, is not an anginal equivalent.
 
Abbreviations

References

1. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. Dec 18 2012;126(25):e354-471. doi:10.1161/CIR.0b013e318277d6a0
2. Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. Oct 2013;34(38):2949-3003. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/eht296
3. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. Nov 23 2010;56(22):1864-94. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2010.07.005
4. Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU, et al. ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. Feb 4 2014;63(4):380-406. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.11.009
5. Cheng VY, Berman DS, Rozanski A, et al. Performance of the traditional age, sex, and angina typicality-based approach for estimating pretest probability of angiographically significant coronary artery disease in patients undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography: results from the multinational coronary CT angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: an international multicenter registry (CONFIRM). Circulation. Nov 29 2011;124(22):2423-32, 1-8. doi:10.1161/circulationaha.111.039255
6. Douglas PS, Hoffmann U, Patel MR, et al. Outcomes of anatomical versus functional testing for coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. Apr 2 2015;372(14):1291-300. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1415516
7. Fordyce CB, Newby DE, Douglas PS. Diagnostic Strategies for the Evaluation of Chest Pain: Clinical Implications From SCOT-HEART and PROMISE. J Am Coll Cardiol. Feb 23 2016;67(7):843-52. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.11.055
8. Newby D, Williams M, Hunter A, et al. CT coronary angiography in patients with suspected angina due to coronary heart disease (SCOT-HEART): an open-label, parallel-group, multicentre trial. Lancet. Jun 13 2015;385(9985):2383-91. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60291-4
9. Gulati M, Levy PD, Mukherjee D, et al. 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. Nov 30 2021;78(22):e187-e285. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.07.053
10. Patel MR, Bailey SR, Bonow RO, et al. ACCF/SCAI/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2012 appropriate use criteria for diagnostic catheterization: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. May 29 2012;59(22):1995-2027. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.03.003
11. Patel MR, White RD, Abbara S, et al. 2013 ACCF/ACR/ASE/ASNC/SCCT/SCMR appropriate utilization of cardiovascular imaging in heart failure: a joint report of the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Committee and the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force. J Am Coll Cardiol. May 28 2013;61(21):2207-31. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.02.005
12. Doherty JU, Kort S, Mehran R, et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2019 Appropriate Use Criteria for Multimodality Imaging in the Assessment of Cardiac Structure and Function in Nonvalvular Heart Disease : A Report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Nucl Cardiol. Aug 2019;26(4):1392-1413. doi:10.1007/s12350-019-01751-7
13. Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. Sep 21 2017;38(36):2739-2791. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehx391
14. Chaikriangkrai K, Jhun HY, Shantha GPS, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Coronary Computed Tomography Before Aortic Valve Replacement: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Thorac Imaging. Jul 2018;33(4):207-216. doi:10.1097/rti.0000000000000322
15. Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American

1. Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. Jun 10 2014;63(22):e57-185. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.02.536

16. Bluemke DA, Achenbach S, Budoff M, et al. Noninvasive coronary artery imaging: magnetic resonance angiography and multidetector computed tomography angiography: a scientific statement from the american heart association committee on cardiovascular imaging and intervention of the council on cardiovascular radiology and intervention, and the councils on clinical cardiology and cardiovascular disease in the young. Circulation. Jul 29 2008;118(5):586-606. doi:10.1161/circulationaha.108.189695
17. Gräni C, Buechel RR, Kaufmann PA, Kwong RY. Multimodality Imaging in Individuals With Anomalous Coronary Arteries. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. Apr 2017;10(4):471-481. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.02.004
18. Newburger JW, Takahashi M, Burns JC. Kawasaki Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. Apr 12 2016;67(14):1738-49. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.12.073
19. Sachdeva R, Valente AM, Armstrong AK, et al. ACC/AHA/ASE/HRS/ISACHD/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/SOPE 2020 Appropriate Use Criteria for Multimodality Imaging During the Follow-Up Care of Patients With Congenital Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee and Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, Heart Rhythm Society, International Society for Adult Congenital Heart Disease, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Pediatric Echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. Feb 18 2020;75(6):657-703. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2019.10.002
20. McCrindle BW, Rowley AH, Newburger JW, et al. Diagnosis, Treatment, and Long-Term Management of Kawasaki Disease: A Scientific Statement for Health Professionals From the American Heart Association. Circulation. Apr 25 2017;135(17):e927-e999. doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000484
21. Eisenberg C, Hulten E, Bittencourt MS, Blankstein R. Use of CT angiography among patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. Feb 2017;7(1):102-105. doi:10.21037/cdt.2016.11.08
22. Nakamura S, Kitagawa K, Goto Y, et al. Incremental Prognostic Value of Myocardial Blood Flow Quantified With Stress Dynamic Computed Tomography Perfusion Imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. Jul 2019;12(7 Pt 2):1379-1387. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.05.021
23. Pontone G, Baggiano A, Andreini D, et al. Stress Computed Tomography Perfusion Versus Fractional Flow Reserve CT Derived in Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: The PERFECTION Study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. Aug 2019;12(8 Pt 1):1487-1497. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.08.023
24. Abbara S, Blanke P, Maroules CD, et al. SCCT guidelines for the performance and acquisition of coronary computed tomographic angiography: A report of the society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee: Endorsed by the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. Nov-Dec 2016;10(6):435-449. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2016.10.002
25. Henzlova MJ, Duvall WL, Einstein AJ, Travin MI, Verberne HJ. ASNC imaging guidelines for SPECT nuclear cardiology procedures: Stress, protocols, and tracers. J Nucl Cardiol. Jun 2016;23(3):606-39. doi:10.1007/s12350-015-0387-x
26. Shen WK, Sheldon RS, Benditt DG, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Patients With Syncope: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol. Aug 1 2017;70(5):620-663. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.03.002
27. Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Harrell FE, Jr., Lee KL, Califf RM, Pryor DB. Exercise treadmill score for predicting prognosis in coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. Jun 1987;106(6):793-800. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-106-6-793
28. D'Agostino RB, Sr., Vasan RS, Pencina MJ, et al. General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. Feb 12 2008;117(6):743-53. doi:10.1161/circulationaha.107.699579
29. Arnett DK, Blumenthal RS, Albert MA, et al. 2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. Sep 10 2019;74(10):e177-e232. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2019.03.010
30. Goff DC, Jr., Lloyd-Jones DM, Bennett G, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. Jul 1 2014;63(25 Pt B):2935-2959. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.11.005
31. McClelland RL, Jorgensen NW, Budoff M, et al. 10-Year Coronary Heart Disease Risk Prediction Using Coronary Artery Calcium and Traditional Risk Factors: Derivation in the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) With Validation in the HNR (Heinz Nixdorf Recall) Study and the DHS (Dallas Heart Study). J Am Coll Cardiol. Oct 13 2015;66(15):1643-53. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.08.035
32. Ridker PM, Buring JE, Rifai N, Cook NR. Development and validation of improved algorithms for the assessment of global cardiovascular risk in women: the Reynolds Risk Score. Jama. Feb 14 2007;297(6):611-9. doi:10.1001/jama.297.6.611
33. Patel MR, Calhoon JH, Dehmer GJ, et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2017 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. May 2 2017;69(17):2212-2241. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.02.001
34. Mintz G. IVUS in PCI Guidance. American College of Cardiology. Updated June 13, 2016. Accessed January 27, 2023. https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/articles/2016/06/13/10/01/ivus-in-pci-guidance
35. Lotfi A, Davies JE, Fearon WF, Grines CL, Kern MJ, Klein LW. Focused update of expert consensus statement: Use of invasive assessments of coronary physiology and structure: A position statement of the society of cardiac angiography and interventions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. Aug 1 2018;92(2):336-347. doi:10.1002/ccd.27672
36. Patel MR, Bailey SR, Bonow RO, et al. ACCF/SCAI/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2012 appropriate use criteria for diagnostic catheterization: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. Jul 2012;144(1):39-71. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.04.013
37. Mintz G. IVUS in PCI Guidance. American College of Cardiology. Updated June 13, 2016. Accessed October 22, 2021. https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/articles/2016/06/13/10/01/ivus-in-pci-guidance
38. Davies JE, Sen S, Dehbi HM, et al. Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI. N Engl J Med. May 11 2017;376(19):1824-1834. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1700445
39. Götberg M, Christiansen EH, Gudmundsdottir IJ, et al. Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI. N Engl J Med. May 11 2017;376(19):1813-1823. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1616540
40. Götberg M, Cook CM, Sen S, Nijjer S, Escaned J, Davies JE. The Evolving Future of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol. Sep 12 2017;70(11):1379-1402. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.07.770
41. Moya A, Sutton R, Ammirati F, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (version 2009). Eur Heart J. Nov 2009;30(21):2631-71. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehp298

Codes

Procedure and diagnosis codes on Medical Policy documents are included only as a general reference tool for each policy. They may not be all-inclusive. 

This medical policy was developed through consideration of peer-reviewed medical literature generally recognized by the relevant medical community, U.S. FDA approval status, nationally accepted standards of medical practice and accepted standards of medical practice in this community, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association technology assessment program (TEC) and other nonaffiliated technology evaluation centers, reference to federal regulations, other plan medical policies, and accredited national guidelines.

"Current Procedural Terminology © American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved" 

History From 2024 Forward     

01012024  NEW POLICY

04/30/2024 Annual review, no change to policy intent.