Coronary artery: Quantitative evaluation of normal diameter determined with electron-beam CT compared with cine coronary angiography - Initial experience

Radiology

Volumn 226, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 263-271

  Funabashi, Nobusada ^a   Kobayashi, Yoshiki ^b   Perlroth, Mark ^b   Rubin, Geoffrey D ^b  

^a CHIBA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Computed tomography (CT), electron beam; Computed tomography (CT), image processing; Coronary vessels, CT

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTERY DIAMETER; ARTICLE; BLOOD VESSEL DIAMETER; CALCULATION; CINEANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; ELECTRON BEAM; ELECTRON BEAM TOMOGRAPHY; HEART TRANSPLANTATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECIPIENT;

CINEANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY VESSELS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 0037260063     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2261011211     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Napel S, Rutt BK, Pflugfelder P. Three-dimensional images of the coronary arteries from ultrafast computed tomography: method and comparison with two-dimensional arteriography. Am J Cardiac Imaging 1989; 3:237-243.
2. Achenbach S, Moshage W, Ropers D, et al. Value of electron-beam computed tomography for the noninvasive detection of high-grade coronary-artery stenoses and occlusions. N Engl J Med 1999; 339: 1964-1971.
3. Moshage WEL, Achenbach S, Seese B, Bachmann K, Kirchgeorg M. Coronary artery stenosis: three-dimensional imaging with electrocardiographically triggered, contrast agent-enhanced, electron-beam CT. Radiology 1995; 196:707-714.
4. Chernoff DM, Ritchie CJ, Higgins CB. Evaluation of electron beam CT coronary angiography in healthy subjects. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:93-99.
5. Rubin GD, Beaulieu CF, Argiro V, et al. Perspective volume rendering of CT and MR images: applications for endoscopic imaging. Radiology 1996; 199:321-330.
6. Achenbach S, Moshage W, Ropers D, Bachmann K. Curved multiplanar reconstructions for the evaluation of contrast-enhanced electron beam CT of the coronary arteries. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:895-899.
7. Funabashi N, Rubin GD, Kobayashi Y, Shifrin RY, Wexler L, Perlroth M. Accuracy of coronary artery dimensions with electron-beam CT angiography: comparison of measurement methods (abstr). Radiology 1999; 213(P):269.
8. Pomerantsev EV, Kobayashi Y, Fitzgerald PJ, et al. Coronary stents: in vitro aspects of an angiographic and ultrasound quantification with in vivo correlation. Circulation 1998; 98:1495-1503.
9. Wise SW, Hopper KD, Have TT, Schwartz T. Measuring carotid artery stenosis using CT angiography: the dilemma of artifactual lumen eccentricity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:919-923.
10. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 8476:307-310.
11. Leung WH, Sanders W, Alderman EL. Coronary artery quantitation and data management system for paired cineangiograms: catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1991; 24:121-134.
12. Shimamoto R, Suzuki J, Nishikawa J, et al. Measuring the diameter of coronary arteries on MR angiograms using spatial profile curves. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:889-893.
13. Achenbach S, Moshage W, Ropers D, Bachmann K. Comparison of vessel diameters in electron beam tomography and quantitative coronary angiography. Int J Card Imaging 1998; 14:1-7.