Health policy and practice: Canadian association of radiologists: Consensus guidelines and standards for cardiac CT

Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 19-34

  Dennie, Carole J ^a   Leipsic, Jonathan ^b   Brydie, Alan ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^c DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

CAR; Computed tomography angiography; Coronary angiography; Coronary artery calcium; Coronary artery disease; CT; Detection; Guidelines; MDCT; Multidetector CT; Standards

Indexed keywords

CALCIUM;

ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONGENITAL HEART DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY ANOMALY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORONARY VEIN; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEART LEFT ATRIUM; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INTRAVASCULAR ULTRASOUND; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PERFORMANCE; PERICARDIAL DISEASE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTION; PREVALENCE; PROGNOSIS; PULMONARY VEIN; RADIOLOGIST; REVIEW; CANADA; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY BLOOD VESSEL; HISTOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGY; STANDARD;

CANADA; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY VESSELS; HUMANS; RADIOLOGY; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 67649130252     PISSN: 08465371     EISSN: 08465371     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.carj.2009.02.006     Document Type: Article

References (187)

1. Budoff MJ, Cohen MC, Garcia MJ, et al. ACCF/AHA clinical competence statement on cardiac imaging with computed tomography and magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association/American College of Physicians Task Force on Clinical Competence and Training. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:383e402.
2. Jacobs JE, Boxt LM, Desjardins B, et al. ACR practice guideline for the performance and interpretation of cardiac computed tomography (CT). J Am Coll Radiol 2006;3:677-85.
3. 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 2008;118:586-606.
4. Schroeder S, Achenbach S, Bengel F, et al. Cardiac computed tomography: indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements: report of a Writing Group deployed by the Working Group Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2008;29:531-56.
5. Greenland P, Bonow RO, Brundage BH, et al. ACCF/AHA 2007 clinical expert consensus document on coronary artery calcium scoring by computed tomography in global cardiovascular risk assessment and in evaluation of patients with chest pain: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force (ACCF/AHA Writing Committee to Update the 2000 Expert Consensus Document on Electron Beam Computed Tomography). Circulation 2007;115:402-26.
6. Sangiorgi G, Rumberger JA, Severson A, et al. Arterial calcification and not lumen stenosis is highly correlated with atherosclerotic plaque burden in humans: a histologic study of 723 coronary artery segments using nondecalcifying methodology. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;31:126-33.
7. Becker CR, Kleffel T, Crispin A, et al. Coronary artery calcium measurement: agreement of multirow detector and electron beam CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:1295-1298.
8. Daniell AL, Wong ND, Friedman JD, et al. Concordance of coronary artery calcium estimates between MDCT and electron beam tomography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;185:1542-5.
9. Detrano RC, Anderson M, Nelson J, et al. Coronary calcium measurements: effect of CT scanner type and calcium measure on rescan reproducibilitydMESA study. Radiology 2005;236:477-84.
10. Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M, Hofman A, et al. Coronary calcification improves cardiovascular risk prediction in the elderly. Circulation 2005;112:572-7.
11. Arad Y, Spadaro LA, Goodman K, et al. Prediction of coronary events with electron beam computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 36:1253-60.
12. Greenland P, LaBree L, Azen SP, et al. Coronary artery calcium score combined with Framingham score for risk prediction in asymptomatic individuals. JAMA 2004;291:210-5.
13. Kondos GT, Hoff JA, Sevrukov A, et al. Electron-beam tomography coronary artery calcium and cardiac events: a 37-month follow-up of 5635 initially asymptomatic low- to intermediate-risk adults. Circulation 2003;107:2571-6.
14. LaMonte MJ, FitzGerald SJ, Church TS, et al. Coronary artery calcium score and coronary heart disease events in a large cohort of asymptomatic men and women. Am J Epidemiol 2005;162:421-9.
15. Taylor AJ, Bindeman J, Feuerstein I, et al. Coronary calcium independently predicts incident premature coronary heart disease over measured cardiovascular risk factors: mean three-year outcomes in the Prospective Army Coronary Calcium (PACC) project. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:807-14.
16. Wilson PW, D'Agostino RB, Levy D, et al. Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation 1998;97: 1837-47.
17. Assmann G, Cullen P, Schulte H. Simple scoring scheme for calculating the risk of acute coronary events based on the 10-year follow-up of the prospective cardiovascular Munster (PROCAM) study. Circulation 2002;105:310-5.
18. Conroy RM, Pyörälä K, Fitzgerald AP, et al. Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project. Eur Heart J 2003;24:987-1003.
19. Naghavi M, Falk E, Hecht HS, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patientdpart III: executive summary of the Screening for Heart Attack Prevention and Education (SHAPE) Task Force report. Am J Cardiol 2006;98:2H-15H.
20. O'Rourke RA, Brundage BH, Froelicher VF, et al. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Expert Consensus document on electron-beam computed tomography for the diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease. Circulation 2000;102:126-40.
21. Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS, et al. Assessment of coronary artery disease by cardiac computed tomography: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and Committee on Cardiac Imaging, Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation 2006;114:1761-91.
22. Horiguchi J, Matsuura N, Yamamoto H, et al. Variability of repeated coronary artery calcium measurements by 1.25-mm- and 2.5-mmthickness images on prospective electrocardiograph-triggered 64-slice CT. Eur Radiol 2008;18:209-16.
23. Groen JM, Greuter MJ, Vliegenthart R, et al. Calcium scoring using 64-slice MDCT, dual source CT and EBT: a comparative phantom study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;24:547-556.
24. Achenbach S, Giesler T, Ropers D, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses by contrast-enhanced, retrospectively electrocardiographically- gated, multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2001; 103:2535-8.
25. Kopp AF, Schroeder S, Kuettner A, et al. Non-invasive coronary angiography with high resolution multidetector-row computed tomography. Results in 102 patients. Eur Heart J 2002;23:1714-25.
26. Hamon M, Morello R, Riddell JW. Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiographydmeta-analysis. Radiology 2007;245: 720-31.
27. Vanhoenacker PK, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Van Heste R, et al. Diagnostic performance of multidetector CT angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease: meta-analysis. Radiology 2007;244:419-428.
28. Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 2005;26:1482-7.
29. 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;97:343e8.
30. 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;46:147-54.
31. 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;112:2318-23.
32. Ong TK, Chin SP, Liew CK, et al. Accuracy of 64-row multidetector computed tomography in detecting coronary artery disease in 134 symptomatic patients: influence of calcification. Am Heart J 2006; 151:1323.e1-6
33. 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;46:552-7.
34. Schuijf JD, Pundziute G, Jukema JW, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64- slice multislice computed tomography in the noninvasive evaluation of significant coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 2006;98:145-8. (Pubitemid 43975510)
35. Weustink AC, Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, et al. Reliable high-speed coronary computed tomography in symptomatic patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:786-94.
36. Ehara M, Surmely JF, Kawai M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography for detecting angiographically significant coronary artery stenosis in an unselected consecutive patient population: comparison with conventional invasive angiography. Circ J 2006;70:564e71.
37. Nikolaou K, Knez A, Rist C, et al. Accuracy of 64-MDCT in the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187: 111-7.
38. Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, Van Mieghem CA, et al. Pre-operative computed tomography coronary angiography to detect significant coronary artery disease in patients referred for cardiac valve surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:1658-65.
39. Mühlenbruch G, Seyfarth T, Soo CS, et al. Diagnostic value of 64- slice multi-detector row cardiac CTA in symptomatic patients. Eur Radiol 2007;17:603-9.
40. Plass A, Grünenfelder J, Leschka S, et al. Coronary artery imaging with 64-slice computed tomography from cardiac surgical perspective. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2006;30:109-16.
41. Ong K, Chin SP, Chan WL, et al. Feasibility and accuracy of 64-row MDCT coronary imaging from a centre with early experience: a review and comparison with established centres. Med J Malaysia 2005;60:629-36.
42. Sun Z, Lin C, Davidson R, et al. Diagnostic value of 64-slice CT angiography in coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 2008;67:78-84.
43. Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS, et al. 64-slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 2008; 94:1386-93.
44. Stein PD, Yaekoub AY, Matta F, et al. 64-slice CT for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 2008;121: 715-25.
45. Phillips WC, Scott JA, Blasczcynski G. Statistics for diagnostic procedures. I. How sensitive is "sensitivity"; how specific is "specificity"? AJR Am J Roentgenol 1983;140:1265-70.
46. Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests 2: predictive values. BMJ 1994;309:102.
47. Brenner H, Gefeller O. Variation of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values with disease prevalence. Stat Med 1997; 16:981-91.
48. Husmann L, Schepis T, Scheffel H, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with low, intermediate, and high cardiovascular risk. Acad Radiol 2008;15:452-61.
49. Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CA, Mollet NR, et al. 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with high, intermediate, or low pretest probability of significant coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1469-75.
50. Musto C, Simon P, Nicol E, et al. 64-multislice computed tomography in consecutive patients with suspected or proven coronary artery disease: initial single center experience. Int J Cardiol 2007;114:90-7.
51. Brodoefel H, Reimann A, Burgstahler C, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography in an unselected patient collective: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability and coronary calcifications on image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Eur J Radiol 2008;66:134-41.
52. Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64- multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without know coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:1724-32.
53. Delhaye D, Remy-Jardin M, Rozel C, et al. Coronary artery imaging during preoperative CT staging: preliminary experience with 64-slice multidetector CT in 99 consecutive patients. Eur Radiol 2007;17: 591-602. (Pubitemid 46252337)
54. Burgstahler C, Reimann A, Brodoefel H, et al. Quantitative parameters to compare image quality of non-invasive coronary angiography with 16-slice, 64-slice and dual-source computed tomography. Eur Radiol 2009;19:584-90.
55. Leschka S, Wildermuth S, Boehm T, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. Radiology 2006;241:378-85.
56. Leschka S, Scheffel H, Husmann L, et al. Effect of decrease in heart rate variability on the diagnostic accuracy of 64-MDCT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1583-90.
57. Uren NG, Melin JA, De Bruyne B, et al. Relation between myocardial blood flow and the severity of coronary-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1782-8.
58. Meijboom WB, Van Mieghem CA, van Pelt N, et al. Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery stenoses: computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography and correlation with fractional flow reserve in patients with stable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:636-43.
59. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I, et al. Functionally relevant coronary artery disease: comparison of 64-section CT angiography with myocardial perfusion SPECT. Radiology 2008;248:414-23.
60. Schuijf JD, Wijns W, Jukema JW, et al. Relationship between noninvasive coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2508-14. (Pubitemid 44881213)
61. Scholte AJ, Schuijf JD, Kharagjitsingh AV, et al. Different manifestations of coronary artery disease by stress SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging, coronary calcium scoring, and multislice CT coronary angiography in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Nucl Cardiol 2008;15:503-9.
62. Herzog C, Zwerner PL, Doll JR, et al. Significant coronary artery stenosis: comparison on per-patient and per-vessel or per-segment basis at 64-section CT angiography. Radiology 2007;244:112-20.
63. Leber AW, Johnson T, Becker A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dualsource multi-slice CT-coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2007;28:2354e60.
64. Busch S, Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, et al. Visual and automatic grading of coronary artery stenoses with 64-slice CT angiography in reference to invasive angiography. Eur Radiol 2007;17:1445-51.
65. Husmann L, Gaemperli O, Schepis T, et al. Accuracy of quantitative coronary angiography with computed tomography and its dependency on plaque composition: plaque composition and accuracy of cardiac CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;24:895-904.
66. Tobis J, Azarbal B, Slavin L. Assessment of intermediate severity coronary lesions in the catheterization laboratory. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:839-48.
67. Sun J, Zhang ZQ, Sun JY, et al. Identification and quantification of coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a comparison of 64-MDCT and intravascular ultrasound. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:748-54.
68. Gregory SA, Ferencik M, Achenbach S, et al. Comparison of sixty-four-slice multidetector computed tomographic coronary angiography to coronary angiography with intravascular ultrasound for the detection of transplant vasculopathy. Am J Cardiol 2006;98: 877-84.
69. Sato A, Hiroe M, Tamura M, et al. Quantitative measures of coronary stenosis severity by 64-Slice CT angiography and relation to physiologic significance of perfusion in nonobese patients: comparison with stress myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med 2008;49: 564e72.
70. Caussin C, Larchez C, Ghostine S, et al. Comparison of coronary minimal lumen area quantification by sixty-four-slice computed tomography versus intravascular ultrasound for intermediate stenosis. Am J Cardiol 2006;98:871-6.
71. Leber AW, Becker A, Knez A, et al. Accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography to classify and quantify plaque volumes in the proximalcoronary system: a comparative study using intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:672-7.
72. Otsuka M, Bruining N, Van Pelt NC, et al. Quantification of coronary plaque by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparison with quantitative intracoronary ultrasound. Invest Radiol 2008;43:314-21.
73. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Nieman K, et al. Noninvasive assessment of plaque morphology and composition in culprit and stable lesions in acute coronary syndrome and stable lesions in stable angina by multidetector computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47: 1655-62.
74. Huang WC, Wu MT, Chiou KR, et al. Assessing culprit lesions and active complex lesions in patients with early acute myocardial infarction by multidetector computed tomography. Circ J 2008;72: 1806-13.
75. Nakazawa G, Tanabe K, Onuma Y, et al. Efficacy of culprit plaque assessment by 64-slice multidetector computed tomography to predict transient no-reflow phenomenon during percutaneous coronary intervention. Am Heart J 2008;155:1150-7.
76. Motoyama S, Kondo T, Sarai M, et al. Multislice computed tomographic characteristics of coronary lesions in acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:319-26.
77. Tanaka A, Shimada K, Yoshida K, et al. Non-invasive assessment of plaque rupture by 64-slice multidetector computed tomographydcomparison with intravascular ultrasound. Circ J 2008;72: 1276-81.
78. Choi BJ, Kang DK, Tahk SJ, et al. Comparison of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography with spectral analysis of intravascular ultrasound backscatter signals for characterizations of noncalcified coronary arterial plaques. Am J Cardiol 2008;102:988-93.
79. Maintz D, Seifarth H, Raupach R, et al. 64-slice multidetector coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 68 different stents. Eur Radiol 2006;16:818-26.
80. Sheth T, Dodd JD, Hoffmann U, et al. Coronary stent assessability by 64 slice multi-detector computed tomography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2007;69:933-8.
81. Hecht HS, Zaric M, Jelnin V, et al. Usefulness of 64-detector computed tomographic angiography for diagnosing in-stent restenosis in native coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol 2008;101:820-4.
82. Carrabba N, Bamoshmoosh M, Carusi LM, et al. Usefulness of 64- slice multidetector computed tomography for detecting drug eluting in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 2007;100:1754-8.
83. Carbone I, Francone M, Algeri E, et al. Non-invasive evaluation of coronary artery stent patency with retrospectively ECG-gated 64-slice CT angiography. Eur Radiol 2008;18:234-43.
84. DasKM,El-MenyarAA, SalamAM, et al. Contrast-enhanced 64-section coronary multidetector CT angiography versus conventional coronary angiography for stent assessment. Radiology 2007;245:424-32.
85. Schuijf JD, Pundziute G, Jukema JW, et al. Evaluation of patients with previous coronary stent implantation with 64-section CT. Radiology 2007;245:416-423.
86. Oncel D, Oncel G, Karaca M. Coronary stent patency and in-stent restenosis: determination with 64-section multidetector CT coronary angiographydinitial experience. Radiology 2007;242:403-9.
87. Rixe J, Achenbach S, Ropers D, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent restenosis by 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography. Eur Heart J 2006;27:2567-72. (Pubitemid 44627301)
88. Cademartiri F, Schuijf JD, Pugliese F, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multislice computed tomography coronary angiography to assess instent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2204-10.
89. Ehara M, Kawai M, Surmely JF, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary in-stent restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:951e9.
90. Rist C, von Ziegler F, Nikolaou K, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent patency and restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography. Acad Radiol 2006;13:1465-73. (Pubitemid 44810002)
91. Sun Z, Davidson R, Lin CH. Multi-detector row CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 2007. In press.
92. Pouleur AC, le Polain de Waroux JB, Pasquet A, et al. Aortic valve area assessment: multidetector CT compared with cine MR imaging and transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography. Radiology 2007;244:745-54.
93. Malagutti P, Nieman K, Meijboom WB, et al. Use of 64-slice CT in symptomatic patients after coronary bypass surgery: evaluation of grafts and coronary arteries. Eur Heart J 2007;28:1879-85.
94. Pache G, Saueressig U, Frydrychowicz A, et al. Initial experience with 64-slice cardiac CT: non-invasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts. Eur Heart J 2006;27:976-80.
95. Dikkers R, Willems TP, Tio RA, et al. The benefit of 64-MDCT prior to invasive coronary angiography in symptomatic post-CABG patients. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2007;23:369-77.
96. Ropers D, Pohle FK, Kuettner A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography in patients after bypass surgery using 64-slice spiral computed tomography with 330-ms gantry rotation. Circulation 2006;114:2334-41, quiz 2334.
97. Meyer TS, Martinoff S, Hadamitzky M, et al. Improved noninvasive assessment of coronary artery bypass grafts with 64-slice computed tomographic angiography in an unselected patient population. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:946-50.
98. Jabara R, Chronos N, Klein L, et al. Comparison of multidetector 64- slice computed tomographic angiography to coronary angiography to assess the patency of coronary artery bypass grafts. Am J Cardiol 2007;99:1529-34.
99. Onuma Y, Tanabe K, Chihara R, et al. Evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts and native coronary arteries using 64-slice multidetector computed tomography. Am Heart J 2007;154:519-26.
100. Feuchtner GM, Schachner T, Bonatti J, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-slice computed tomography in evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:574-80.
101. Angelini P, Velasco JA, Flamm S. Coronary anomalies: incidence, pathophysiology, and clinical relevance. Circulation 2002;105: 2449-54.
102. Maron BJ. Sudden death in young athletes. N Engl J Med 2003;349: 1064-75.
103. Ishikawa T, Brandt PW. Anomalous origin of the left main coronary artery from the right anterior aortic sinus: angiographic definition of anomalous course. Am J Cardiol 1985;55:770-6.
104. Datta J, White CS, Gilkeson RC, et al. Anomalous coronary arteries in adults: depiction at multi-detector row CT angiography. Radiology 2005;235:812-8.
105. Duran C, Kantarci M, Durur Subasi I, et al. Remarkable anatomic anomalies of coronary arteries and their clinical importance: a multidetector computed tomography angiographic study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006;30:939-48.
106. Kim SY, Seo JB, Do KH, et al. Coronary artery anomalies: classification and ECG-gated multi-detector row CT findings with angiographic correlation. Radiographics 2006;26:317-34.
107. Schmid M, Achenbach S, Ludwig J, et al. Visualization of coronary artery anomalies by contrast-enhanced multi-detector row spiral computed tomography. Int J Cardiol 2006;111:430-5. (Pubitemid 44205297)
108. Schepis T, Gaemperli O, Koepfli P, et al. Comparison of 64-slice CT with gated SPECT for evaluation of left ventricular function. J Nucl Med 2006;47:1288-94.
109. Cury RC, Nieman K, Shapiro MD, et al. Comprehensive assessment of myocardial perfusion defects, regional wall motion, and left ventricular function by using 64-section multidetector CT. Radiology 2008;248:466-75.
110. Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, et al. Sixteen-slice spiral CT versus MR imaging for the assessment of left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction. Eur Radiol 2005;15:714-20.
111. Belge B, Coche E, Pasquet A, et al. Accurate estimation of global and regional cardiac function by retrospectively gated multidetector row computed tomography: comparison with cine magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 2006;16:1424-33.
112. Dewey M, Muller M, Eddicks S, et al. Evaluation of global and regional left ventricular function with 16-slice computed tomography, biplane cineventriculography, and two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2034e-44.
113. Henneman MM, Bax JJ, Schuijf JD, et al. Global and regional left ventricular function: a comparison between gated SPECT, 2D echocardiography and multi-slice computed tomography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:1452-60.
114. Henneman MM, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, et al. Assessment of global and regional left ventricular function and volumes with 64-slice MSCT: a comparison with 2D echocardiography. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:480-7.
115. Muhlenbruch G, Das M, Hohl C, et al. Global left ventricular function in cardiac CT. Evaluation of an automated 3D region-growing segmentation algorithm. Eur Radiol 2006;16:1117-23.
116. Puesken M, Fischbach R, Wenker M, et al. Global left-ventricular function assessment using dual-source multidetector CT: effect of improved temporal resolution on ventricular volume measurement. Eur Radiol 2008;18:2087-94.
117. Schlosser T, Mohrs OK, Magedanz A, et al. Assessment of left ventricular function and mass in patients undergoing computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography using 64-detector-row CT: comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Radiol 2007;48: 30-5.
118. Schlosser T, Pagonidis K, Herborn CU, et al. Assessment of left ventricular parameters using 16-MDCT and new software for endocardial and epicardial border delineation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:765-73.
119. Sugeng L, Mor-Avi V, Weinert L, et al. Quantitative assessment of left ventricular size and function: side-by-side comparison of real-time three-dimensional echocardiography and computed tomography with magnetic resonance reference. Circulation 2006;114:654-61.
120. van der Vleuten PA, de Jonge GJ, Lubbers DD, et al. Evaluation of global left ventricular function assessment by dual-source computed tomography compared with MRI. Eur Radiol 2009;19:271-7.
121. van der Vleuten PA, Willems TP, Gotte MJ, et al. Quantification of global left ventricular function: comparison of multidetector computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. a metaanalysis and review of the current literature. Acta Radiol 2006;47: 1049-57.
122. Plumhans C, Muhlenbruch G, Rapaee A, et al. Assessment of global right ventricular function on 64-MDCT compared with MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1358-61.
123. Dogan H, Kroft LJ, Bax JJ, et al. MDCT assessment of right ventricular systolic function. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186(Suppl 2):S366-S370.
124. Delhaye D, Remy-Jardin M, Teisseire A, et al. MDCT of right ventricular function: comparison of right ventricular ejection fraction estimation and equilibrium radionuclide ventriculography, part 1. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:1597-604. (Pubitemid 44788693)
125. Remy-Jardin M, Delhaye D, Teisseire A, et al. MDCT of right ventricular function: impact of methodologic approach in estimation of right ventricular ejection fraction, part 2. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:1605-9. (Pubitemid 44788694)
126. Coche E, Vlassenbroek A, Roelants V, et al. Evaluation of biventricular ejection fraction with ECG-gated 16-slice CT: preliminary findings in acute pulmonary embolism in comparison with radionuclide ventriculography. Eur Radiol 2005;15:1432-40.
127. Dogan H, Kroft LJ, Huisman MV, et al. Right ventricular function in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: analysis with electrocardiography- synchronized multi-detector row CT. Radiology 2007;242: 78-84.
128. Matsui H, Yasukochi S, Haseyama K, et al. Quantification of right and left ventricular volumes in children with congenital heart disease by multidetector-row computed tomography. Pediatr Cardiol 2007;28: 267-71.
129. Feuchtner GM, Dichtl W, Friedrich GJ, et al. Multislice computed tomography for detection of patients with aortic valve stenosis and quantification of severity. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:1410-7.
130. Feuchtner GM, Muller S, Bonatti J, et al. Sixty-four slice CT evaluation of aortic stenosis using planimetry of the aortic valve area. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:197-203.
131. Alkadhi H, Wildermuth S, Plass A, et al. Aortic stenosis: comparative evaluation of 16-detector row CT and echocardiography. Radiology 2006;240:47-55.
132. Tanaka H, Shimada K, Yoshida K, et al. The simultaneous assessment of aortic valve area and coronary artery stenosis using 16-slice multidetector- row computed tomography in patients with aortic stenosis comparison with echocardiography. Circ J 2007;71:1593-8.
133. Habis M, Daoud B, Roger VL, et al. Comparison of 64-slice computed tomography planimetry and Doppler echocardiography in the assessment of aortic valve stenosis. J Heart Valve Dis 2007;16: 216-24.
134. Bouvier E, Logeart D, Sablayrolles JL, et al. Diagnosis of aortic valvular stenosis by multislice cardiac computed tomography. Eur Heart J 2006;27:3033-8.
135. Feuchtner GM, Dichtl W, Muller S, et al. 64-MDCT for diagnosis of aortic regurgitation in patients referred to CT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191:W1-7.
136. Jassal DS, Shapiro MD, Neilan TG, et al. 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for detection of aortic regurgitation and quantification of severity. Invest Radiol 2007;42:507-12.
137. Alkadhi H, Desbiolles L, Husmann L, et al. Aortic regurgitation: assessment with 64-section CT. Radiology 2007;245:111-21.
138. Alkadhi H, Wildermuth S, Bettex DA, et al. Mitral regurgitation: quantification with 16-detector row CTdinitial experience. Radiology 2006;238:454-63.
139. Nagao M, Matsuoka H, Kawakami H, et al. Quantification of myocardial perfusion by contrast-enhanced 64-MDCT: characterization of ischemic myocardium. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191: 19-25.
140. Nicol ED, Stirrup J, Reyes E, et al. Sixty-four-slice computed tomography coronary angiography compared with myocardial perfusion scintigraphy for the diagnosis of functionally significant coronary stenoses in patients with a low to intermediate likelihood of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 2008;15:311-8.
141. George RT, Jerosch-Herold M, Silva C, et al. Quantification of myocardial perfusion using dynamic 64-detector computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2007;42:815-22.
142. Kurata A, Mochizuki T, Koyama Y, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging using adenosine triphosphate stress multi-slice spiral computed tomography: alternative to stress myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Circ J 2005;69:550-7.
143. Nikolaou K, Sanz J, Poon M, et al. Assessment of myocardial perfusion and viability from routine contrast-enhanced 16-detectorrow computed tomography of the heart: preliminary results. Eur Radiol 2005;15:864-71.
144. Lardo AC, Cordeiro MA, Silva C, et al. Contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography viability imaging after myocardial infarction: characterization of myocyte death, microvascular obstruction, and chronic scar. Circulation 2006;113:394-404.
145. Nieman K, Shapiro MD, Ferencik M, et al. Reperfused myocardial infarction: contrast-enhanced 64-section CT in comparison to MR imaging. Radiology 2008;247:49-56.
146. Gerber BL, Belge B, Legros GJ, et al. Characterization of acute and chronic myocardial infarcts by multidetector computed tomography: comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. Circulation 2006;113:823-33.
147. Shah DC, Haissaguerre M, Jais P, et al. Electrophysiologically guided ablation of the pulmonary veins for the curative treatment of atrial fibrillation. Ann Med 2000;32:408-16.
148. Oral H, Knight BP, Tada H, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation. Circulation 2002;105:1077-81. (Pubitemid 34212617)
149. Morady F. Mechanisms and catheter ablation therapy of atrial fibrillation. Tex Heart Inst J 2005;32:199e201.
150. Ouyang F, Bansch D, Ernst S, et al. Complete isolation of left atrium surrounding the pulmonary veins: new insights from the double-Lasso technique in paroxysmal atrialfibrillation. Circulation 2004;110:2090-6.
151. Schwartzman D, Lacomis J, Wigginton WG. Characterization of left atrium and distal pulmonary vein morphology using multidimensional computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:1349-57.
152. Cronin P, Sneider MB, Kazerooni EA, et al. MDCT of the left atrium and pulmonary veins in planning radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: a how-to guide. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;183:767-78.
153. Lemola K, Sneider M, Desjardins B, et al. Computed tomographic analysis of the anatomy of the left atrium and the esophagus: implications for left atrial catheter ablation. Circulation 2004;110:3655-60.
154. Tops LF, Bax JJ, Zeppenfeld K, et al. Fusion of multislice computed tomography imaging with three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping to guide radiofrequency catheter ablation procedures. Heart Rhythm 2005;2:1076-81.
155. Kistler PM, Rajappan K, Jahngir M, et al. The impact of CT image integration into an electroanatomic mapping system on clinical outcomes of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2006;17:1093-101.
156. Martinek M, Nesser HJ, Aichinger J, et al. Impact of integration of multislice computed tomography imaging into three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping on clinical outcomes, safety, and efficacy using radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007;30:1215-23.
157. Burgstahler C, Trabold T, Kuettner A, et al. Visualization of pulmonary vein stenosis after radio frequency ablation using multi-slice computed tomography: initial clinical experience in 33 patients. Int J Cardiol 2005;102:287-91.
158. Lacomis JM, Goitein O, Deible C, et al. CT of the pulmonary veins. J Thorac Imaging 2007;22:63-76.
159. Abraham WT, Hayes DL. Cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure. Circulation 2003;108:2596-603.
160. Puglisi A, Lunati M, Marullo AG, et al. Limited thoracotomy as a second choice alternative to transvenous implant for cardiac resynchronisation therapy delivery. Eur Heart J 2004;25:1063-9
161. Jongbloed MR, Lamb HJ, Bax JJ, et al. Noninvasive visualization of the cardiac venous system using multislice computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:749-53.
162. Van de Veire NR, Marsan NA, Schuijf JD, et al. Noninvasive imaging of cardiac venous anatomy with 64-slice multi-slice computed tomography and noninvasive assessment of left ventricular dyssynchrony by 3-dimensional tissue synchronization imaging in patients with heart failure scheduled for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Am J Cardiol 2008;101:1023-9.
163. Cook SC, Dyke PC, Raman SV. Management of adults with congenital heart disease with cardiovascular computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Computed Tomogr 2008;2:12-22.
164. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007;298:317e23.
165. Nicol ED, Gatzoulis M, Padley SP, et al. Assessment of adult congenital heart disease with multi-detector computed tomography: beyond coronary lumenography. Clin Radiol 2007;62:518-27.
166. Thomas JD, Rubin DN. Tissue harmonic imaging: why does it work? J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1998;11:803-8.
167. Breen JF. Imaging of the pericardium. J Thorac Imaging 2001;16: 47-54.
168. Araoz PA, Mulvagh SL, Tazelaar HD, et al. CT and MR imaging of benign primary cardiac neoplasms with echocardiographic correlation. Radiographics 2000;20:1303-19.
169. Wang ZJ, Reddy GP, Gotway MB, et al. CT and MR imaging of pericardial disease. Radiographics 2003;23:167-80.
170. Kirsch J, Araoz PA, Steinberg FB, et al. Prevalence and significance of incidental extracardiac findings at 64-multidetector coronary CTA. J Thorac Imaging 2007;22:330e4.
171. Onuma Y, Tanabe K, Nakazawa G, et al. Noncardiac findings in cardiac imaging with multidetector computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:402-6.
172. Haller S, Kaiser C, Buser P, et al. Coronary artery imaging with contrast-enhanced MDCT: extracardiac findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:105-110.
173. Schragin JG, Weissfeld JL, Edmundowicz D, et al. Non-cardiac findings on coronary electron beam computed tomography scanning. J Thorac Imaging 2004;19:82-6.
174. Hunold P, Schmermund A, Seibel RM, et al. Prevalence and clinical significance of accidental findings in electron-beam tomographic scans for coronary artery calcification. Eur Heart J 2001; 22:1748-1758.
175. Horton KM, Post WS, Blumenthal RS, et al. Prevalence of significant noncardiac findings on electron-beam computed tomography coronary artery calcium screening examinations. Circulation 2002;106:532-4.
176. Mueller J, Jeudy J, Poston R, et al. Cardiac CT angiography after coronary bypass surgery: prevalence of incidental findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:414-9.
177. Law YM, Huang J, Chen K, et al. Prevalence of significant extracoronary findings on multislice CT coronary angiography examinations and coronary artery calcium scoring examinations. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2008;52:49-56.
178. Dewey M, Schnapauff D, Teige F, et al. Non-cardiac findings on coronary computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 2007;17:2038-43. (Pubitemid 47097461)
179. Budoff MJ, Cohen MC, Garcia MJ, et al. ACCF/AHA clinical competence statement on cardiac imaging with computed tomography and magnetic resonance. Circulation 2005;112:598-617.
180. Kerl JM, Ravenel JG, Nguyen SA, et al. Right heart: split-bolus injection of diluted contrast medium for visualization at coronary CT angiography. Radiology 2008;247:356-64.
181. Kerl JM, Hofmann LK, Thilo C, et al. Coronary CTA: image acquisition and interpretation. J Thorac Imaging 2007;22:22-34.
182. Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology 2008;248:431-7.
183. Earls JP, Berman EL, Urban BA, et al. Prospectively gated transverse coronary CT angiography versus retrospectively gated helical technique: improved image quality and reduced radiation dose. Radiology 2008;246:742-53.
184. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 2006;113:1305-10.
185. Schoepf UJ, Zwerner PL, Savino G, et al. Coronary CT angiography. Radiology 2007;244:48e63.
186. Siegel MJ, Schmidt B, Bradley D, et al. Radiation dose and image quality in pediatric CT: effect of technical factors and phantom size and shape. Radiology 2004;233:515-22.
187. Cheng V, Gutstein A, Wolak A, et al. Moving beyond binary grading of coronary artery stenoses on coronary computed tomography: insights for the imager and referring clinician. J Am Coll Cardiol Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;1:460-71.