Coronary artery stenosis quantification using multislice computed tomography

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 78-84

  Dewey, Marc ^a   Rutsch, Wolfgang ^a   Schnapauff, Dirk ^a   Teige, Florian ^a   Hamm, Bernd ^a  

^a FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Coronary disease; Coronary stenoses; Multislice computed tomography; Quantitative coronary angiography

Indexed keywords

CALCIUM;

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTERY CALCIFICATION; ARTERY DIAMETER; ARTICLE; BIOSENSOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RELIABILITY; STANDARD;

EID: 33846219116     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000251569.01317.60     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ropers D, Baum U, Pohle K, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses with thin-slice multi-detector row spiral computed tomography and multiplanar reconstruction. Circulation. 2003;107:664-666.
2. Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, et al. Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation. 2002;106:2051-2054.
3. Gould KL. Percent coronary stenosis: battered gold standard, pernicious relic or clinical practicality? J Am Coll Cardiol. 1988;11:886-888.
4. Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Manzke R, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 16-detector row CT: effect of heart rate. Radiology. 2005;234:86-97.
5. Cury RC, Pomerantsev EV, Ferencik M, et al. Comparison of the degree of coronary stenoses by multidetector computed tomography versus by quantitative coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol. 2005;96:784-787.
6. Kefer J, Coche E, Legros G, et al. Head-to-head comparison of three-dimensional navigator-gated magnetic resonance imaging and 16-slice computed tomography to detect coronary artery stenosis in patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:92-100.
7. Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O'Neill WW, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:552-557.
8. Cury RC, Ferencik M, Achenbach S, et al. Accuracy of 16-slice multi-detector CT to quantify the degree of coronary artery stenosis: assessment of cross-sectional and longitudinal vessel reconstructions. Eur J Radiol. 2006;57:345-350.
9. Dewey M, Teige F, Schnapauff D, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary artery stenoses with multislice computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:407-415.
10. Dewey M, Lembcke A, Enzweiler CN, et al. Isotropic half-millimeter angiography of coronary artery bypass grafts with 16-slice computed tomography. Ann Thor Surg. 2004;77:800-805.
11. Dewey M, Hoffmann H, Hamm B. Multislice CT coronary angiography: effect of sublingual nitroglycerine on the diameter of coronary arteries. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2006;178:600-604.
12. Stamm G, Nagel HD. CT-expo - a novel program for dose evaluation in CT. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2002;174:1570-1576.
13. Dewey M, Laule M, Krug L, et al. Multisegment and halfscan reconstruction of 16-slice computed tomography for detection of coronary artery stenoses. Invest Radiol. 2004;39:223-229.
14. Dewey M, Müller M, Teige F, et al. Multisegment and halfscan reconstruction of 16-slice computed tomography for assessment of regional and global left ventricular myocardial function. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:400-409.
15. Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL, et al. A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation. 1975;51:5-40.
16. Dewey M, Schnapauff D, Laule M, et al. Multislice CT coronary angiography: evaluation of an automatic vessel detection tool. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2004:478-483.
17. Reiber JH, van der Zwet PM, Koning G, et al. Accuracy and precision of quantitative digital coronary arteriography: observer-, short-, and medium-term variabilities. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1993;28:187-198.
18. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307-310.
19. Popma JJ, Lansky AJ, Yeh W, et al. Reliability of the quantitative angiographic measurements in the New Approaches to Coronary Intervention (NACI) registry: a comparison of clinical site and repeated angiographic core laboratory readings. Am J Cardiol. 1997;80:19K-25K.
20. Sirnes PA, Myreng Y, Molstad P, et al. Reproducibility of quantitative coronary analysis, Assessment of variability due to frame selection, different observers, and different cinefilmless laboratories. Int J Card Imaging. 1996;12:197-203.
21. Tuinenburg JC, Koning G, Hekking E, et al. One core laboratory at two international sites, is that feasible? An inter-core laboratory and intraobserver variability study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2002;56:333-340.
22. Moer R, van Weert AW, Myreng Y, et al. Variability of quantitative coronary angiography: an evaluation of on-site versus core laboratory analysis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2003;19:457-464.
23. Nieman K, van Geuns RJ, Wielopolski P, et al. Noninvasive coronary imaging in the new millennium: a comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance techniques. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2002;3:77-84.
24. Dewey M, Taupitz M. Coronary angiography by magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2003;128:33-35.
25. Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:1482-1487.
26. Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:147-154.
27. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA, et al. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation. 2005;112:2318-2323.
28. Ropers D, Rixe J, Anders K, et al. Usefulness of multidetector row spiral computed tomography with 64- x 0. 6-mm collimation and 330-ms rotation for the noninvasive detection of significant coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97:343-348.
29. Blobel J, Baartman H, Rogalla P, et al. Spatial and temporal resolution with 16-slice computed tomography for cardiac imaging. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2003;175:1264-1271.
30. Flohr T, Stierstorfer K, Raupach R, et al. Performance evaluation of a 64-slice CT system with z-flying focal spot. Fortschr Rontgenstr. 2004;176:1803-1810.
31. Kondo C, Mori S, Endo M, et al. Real-time volumetric imaging of human heart without electrocardiographic gating by 256-detector row computed tomography: initial experience. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2005;29:694-698.
32. Hoffmann R, Mintz GS, Popma JJ, et al. Overestimation of acute lumen gain and late lumen loss by quantitative coronary angiography (compared with intravascular ultrasound) in stented lesions. Am J Cardiol. 1997;80:1277-1281.
33. DeRouen TA, Murray JA, Owen W. Variability in the analysis of coronary arteriograms. Circulation. 1977;55:324-328.
34. Zir LM, Miller SW, Dinsmore RE, et al. Interobserver variability in coronary angiography. Circulation. 1976;53:627-632.
35. Fleming RM, Kirkeeide RL, Smalling RW, et al. Patterns in visual interpretation of coronary arteriograms as detected by quantitative coronary arteriography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;18:945-951.
36. Goldberg RK, Kleiman NS, Minor ST, et al. Comparison of quantitative coronary angiography to visual estimates of lesion severity pre and post PTCA. Am Heart J. 1990;119:178-184.
37. Orford JL, Denktas AE, Williams BA, et al. Routine intravascular ultrasound scanning guidance of coronary stenting is not associated with improved clinical outcomes. Am Heart J. 2004;148:501-506.
38. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Hoffmann U, et al. Assessment of coronary remodeling in stenotic and nonstenotic coronary atherosclerotic lesions by multidetector spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:842-847.
39. Wintersperger BJ, Nikolaou K, von Ziegler F, et al. Image quality, motion artifacts, and reconstruction timing of 64-slice coronary computed tomography angiography with 0.33-second rotation speed. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:436-442.
40. Heuschmid M, Rothfuss J, Schröder S, et al. Left ventricular functional parameters: comparison of 16-slice spiral CT and MRI. Röfo. 2005;177:60-66.
41. Gerber TC, Stratmann BP, Kuzo RS, et al. Effect of acquisition technique on radiation dose and image quality in multidetector row computed tomography coronary angiography with submillimeter collimation. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:556-563.
42. Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, Wintersperger BJ, et al. Dual-source CT cardiac imaging: initial experience. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:1409-1415.