Combined non-invasive anatomical and functional assessment with MSCT and MRI for the detection of significant coronary artery disease in patients with an intermediate pre-test likelihood

Heart

Volumn 96, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 425-431

  Van Werkhoven, Jacob M ^a,b   Heijenbrok, Mark W ^c   Schuijf, Joanne D ^a   Jukema, J Wouter ^a,b   Van Der Wall, Ernst E ^a,b   Schreur, Joop H M ^c   Bax, Jeroen J ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b ROYAL NETHERLANDS ACADEMY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

^c MEDICAL CENTER HAAGLANDEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

IOMEPROL; METOPROLOL;

ADULT; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTERY OCCLUSION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HEART MUSCLE ISCHEMIA; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77949599354     PISSN: 13556037     EISSN: 1468201X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2009.179531     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al. Diagnostic Performance of Coronary Angiography by 64-Row CT. N Engl J Med 2008;359:2324-36.
2. Meijboom WB, Meijs MFL, Schuijf JD, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of 64-slice Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography: A Prospective Multicenter, Multivendor Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:2135-44.
3. Di Carli MF, Dorbala S, Curillova Z, et al. Relationship between CT coronary angiography and stress perfusion imaging in patients with suspected ischemic heart disease assessed by integrated PET-CT imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:799-809.
4. 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.
5. Klocke FJ, Simonetti OP, Judd RM, et al. Limits of detection of regional differences in vasodilated flow in viable myocardium by first-pass magnetic resonance perfusion imaging. Circulation 2001;104:2412-16.
6. Lee DC, Simonetti OP, Harris KR, et al. Magnetic resonance versus radionuclide pharmacological stress perfusion imaging for flow-limiting stenoses of varying severity. Circulation 2004;110:58-65.
7. Costa MA, Shoemaker S, Futamatsu H, et al. Quantitative magnetic resonance perfusion imaging detects anatomic and physiologic coronary artery disease as measured by coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:514-22.
8. Schwitter J, Nanz D, Kneifel S, et al. Assessment of myocardial perfusion in coronary artery disease by magnetic resonance: a comparison with positron emission tomography and coronary angiography. Circulation 2001;103:2230-5.
9. Schwitter J, Wacker CM, van Rossum AC, et al. MR-IMPACT: comparison of perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance with single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease in a multicentre, multivendor, randomized trial. Eur Heart J 2008;29:480-9.
10. Diamond GA, Forrester JS. Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. N Engl J Med 1979;300:1350-8.
11. 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(4 Suppl):5-40.
12. Fuster V, Kim RJ. Frontiers in cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation 2005;112:135-44.
13. Klem I, Heitner JF, Shah DJ, et al. Improved detection of coronary artery disease by stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance with the use of delayed enhancement infarction imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:1630-8.
14. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart - A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation 2002;105:539-42.
15. Wu E, Judd RM, Vargas JD, et al. Visualisation of presence, location, and transmural extent of healed Q-wave and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. Lancet 2001;357:21-8.
16. Giang TH, Nanz D, Coulden R, et al. Detection of coronary artery disease by magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging with various contrast medium doses: first European multi-centre experience. Eur Heart J 2004;25:1657-65.
17. Nagel E, Klein C, Paetsch I, et al. Magnetic resonance perfusion measurements for the noninvasive detection of coronary artery disease. Circulation 2003;108:432-7.
18. Nandalur KR, Dwamena BA, Choudhri AF, et al. Diagnostic performance of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1343-53.
19. Min JK, Shaw L. Noninvasive Diagnostic and Prognostic Assessment of Individuals With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;1:270-81.
20. 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.
21. Rispler S, Keidar Z, Ghersin E, et al. Integrated single-photon emission computed tomography and computed tomography coronary angiography for the assessment of hemodynamically significant coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:1059-67.
22. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I, et al. Cardiac image fusion from stand-alone SPECT and CT: clinical experience. J Nucl Med 2007;48:696-703.
23. van Werkhoven JM, Schuijf JD, Gaemperli O, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography and gated single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:623-32.
24. Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, van der Wall EE, et al. The current status of multislice computed tomography in the diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:604-12.
25. Einstein AJ. Radiation risk from coronary artery disease imaging: how do different diagnostic tests compare? Heart 2008;94:1519-21.
26. Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, et al. Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. Eur Heart J 2008;29:191-7.
27. Rybicki FJ, Otero HJ, Steigner ML, et al. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;24:535-46.
28. Cury RC, Cattani CA, Gabure LA, et al. Diagnostic performance of stress perfusion and delayed-enhancement MR imaging in patients with coronary artery disease. Radiology 2006;240:39-45.
29. Schuijf JD, Kaandorp TA, Lamb HJ, et al. Quantification of myocardial infarct size and transmurality by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in men. Am J Cardiol 2004;94:284-8.