Cardiac and coronary CT comprehensive imaging approach in the assessment of coronary heart disease

Heart

Volumn 97, Issue 15, 2011, Pages 1198-1205

  Williams, Michelle Claire ^a   Reid, J H ^b   McKillop, G ^c   Weir, N W ^b   Van Beek, E J R ^b   Uren, N G ^c   Newby, D E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^c ROYAL INFIRMARY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ATHEROSCLEROTIC PLAQUE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; HEART VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HUMAN; ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; REVIEW;

ANIMALS; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY CIRCULATION; CORONARY DISEASE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY; VENTRICULAR FUNCTION;

EID: 79960162705     PISSN: 13556037     EISSN: 1468201X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300037     Document Type: Review

References (86)

1. Beckmann EC. CT scanning the early days. Br J Radiol 2006;79:5-8. (Pubitemid 43159309)
2. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2071-7.
3. DOH. Imaging and Radiodiagnostic Examinations and Tests, Strategic Health Authorities in England 2009-10. Department of Health, 2010. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Statistics/ Performancedataandstatistics/HospitalActivityStatistics/DH-077487.
4. ISD Scotland. Radiology services. ISD Scotland, 2010. http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/Finance/Costbook/Speciality-Costs/ Radiology.asp.
5. Mark DB, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT 2010 expert consensus document on coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:2663-99.
6. 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. (Pubitemid 351264173)
7. Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 2009;360:213-24.
8. Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med 2010;362:886-95.
9. Hurlock GS, Higashino H, Mochizuki T. History of cardiac computed tomography: single to 320-detector row multislice computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;(25 Suppl 1):31-42.
10. Cooper A, Calvert N, Skinner J, et al. Chest pain of recent onset: Assessment and diagnosis of recent onset chest pain or discomfort of suspected cardiac origin. London: National Clinical Guideline Centre for Acute and Chronic Conditions, 2010.
11. Al Moudi M, Sun Z, Lenzo N. Diagnostic value of SPECT, PET and PET/CT in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: A systematic review. Biomedical Imaging and Intervention Journal 2010;7:e9.
12. 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.
13. Leber AW, Knez A, Becker A, et al. Accuracy of multidetector spiral computed tomography in identifying and differentiating the composition of coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a comparative study with intracoronary ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:1241-7. (Pubitemid 38452602)
14. Achenbach S, Raggi P. Imaging of coronary atherosclerosis by computed tomography. Eur Heart J 2010;31:1442-8.
15. Schepis T, Marwan M, Pflederer T, et al. Quantification of non-calcified coronary atherosclerotic plaques with dual-source computed tomography: comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Heart 2009;96:610-15.
16. van Velzen JE, Schuijf JD, de Graaf FR, et al. Plaque type and composition as evaluated non-invasively by MSCT angiography and invasively by VH IVUS in relation to the degree of stenosis. Heart 2009;95:1990-6.
17. Pohle K, Achenbach S, Macneill B, et al. Characterization of non-calcified coronary atherosclerotic plaque by multi-detector row CT: comparison to IVUS. Atherosclerosis 2007;190:174-80. (Pubitemid 44908312)
18. Pflederer T, Marwan M, Schepis T, et al. Characterization of culprit lesions in acute coronary syndromes using coronary dual-source CT angiography. Atherosclerosis 2010;211:437-44.
19. Kim SY, Kim KS, Seung MJ, et al. The culprit lesion score on multi-detector computed tomography can detect vulnerable coronary artery plaque. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;26:245-52.
20. Leber AW, Becker A, Knez A, et al. Accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography to classify and quantify plaque volumes in the proximal coronary system: a comparative study using intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:672-7. (Pubitemid 43170862)
21. George RT. Computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging: developmental points of emphasis. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2009;7:99-101.
22. Sarwar A, Rieber J, Mooyaart EA, et al. Calcified plaque: measurement of area at thin-section flat-panel CT and 64-section multidetector CT and comparison with histopathologic findings. Radiology 2008;249:301-6.
23. Alvarez RE, Macovski A. Energy-selective reconstructions in X-ray computerized tomography. Phys Med Biol 1976;21:733-44.
24. Rutherford RA, Pullan BR, Isherwood I. X-ray energies for effective atomic number determination. Neuroradiology 1976;11:23-8.
25. Donnino R, Jacobs JE, Doshi JV, et al. Dual-source versus single-source cardiac CT angiography: comparison of diagnostic image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:1051-6.
26. Nikolaou K, Sanz J, Poon M, et al. Assessment of myocardial perfusion and viability from routine contrast-enhanced 16-detector-row computed tomography of the heart: preliminary results. Eur Radiol 2005;15:864-71. (Pubitemid 41166717)
27. Feuerlein S, Roessl E, Proksa R, et al. Multienergy photon-counting K-edge imaging: potential for improved luminal depiction in vascular imaging. Radiology 2008;249:1010-16.
28. Cormode DP, Roessl E, Thran A, et al. Atherosclerotic plaque composition: analysis with multicolor CT and targeted gold nanoparticles. Radiology 2010;256:774-82.
29. Blankstein R, Shturman LD, Rogers IS, et al. Adenosine-induced stress myocardial perfusion imaging using dual-source cardiac computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:1072-84.
30. George RT, Silva C, Cordeiro MA, et al. Multidetector computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging during adenosine stress. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:153-60. (Pubitemid 43929222)
31. Bastarrika G, Ramos-Duran L, Rosenblum MA, et al. Adenosine-stress dynamic myocardial CT perfusion imaging: initial clinical experience. Invest Radiol 2010;45:306-13.
32. Cury RC, Magalhaes TA, Borges AC, et al. Dipyridamole stress and rest myocardial perfusion by 64-detector row computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 2010;106:310-15.
33. Ho KT, Chura KC, Klotz E, et al. Stress and rest dynamic myocardial perfusion imaging by evaluation of complete time-attenuation curves with dual-source CT. JACC: Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;3:811-20.
34. Ko SM, Choi JW, Song MG, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging using adenosineinduced stress dual-energy computed tomography of the heart: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and conventional coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 2010;21:26-35.
35. George RT, Kitagawa K, Laws K, et al. Abstract 4718: Combined adenosine stress perfusion and coronary angiography using 320-row detector dynamic volume computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Circulation 2008;118:S-936.
36. George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, et al. Adenosine stress 64- and 256-row detector computed tomography angiography and perfusion imaging: a pilot study evaluating the transmural extent of perfusion abnormalities to predict atherosclerosis causing myocardial ischemia. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2:174-82.
37. Zoghbi GJ, Dorfman TA, Iskandrian AE. The effects of medications on myocardial perfusion. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:401-16. (Pubitemid 352040813)
38. Lessick J, Dragu A, Mutlak D, et al. Is functional improvement after myocardial infarction predicted with myocardial enhancement patterns at multidetector CT? Radiology 2007;244:736-44.
39. Deussen A. Blood flow heterogeneity in the heart. Basic Res Cardiol 1998;93:430-8. (Pubitemid 29004767)
40. Decking UK. Spatial heterogeneity in the heart: recent insights and open questions. News Physiol Sci 2002;17:246-50. (Pubitemid 36015533)
41. Chareonthaitawee P, Kaufmann PA, Rimoldi O, et al. Heterogeneity of resting and hyperemic myocardial blood flow in healthy humans. Cardiovasc Res 2001;50:151-61. (Pubitemid 32244395)
42. Bergmann SR, Herrero P, Markham J, et al. Noninvasive quantitation of myocardial blood flow in human subjects with oxygen-15-labeled water and positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989;14:639-52. (Pubitemid 19229339)
43. Shapiro MD, Sarwar A, Nieman K, et al. Cardiac computed tomography for prediction of myocardial viability after reperfused acute myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2010;4:267-73.
44. Gemignani AS, Abbott BG. The emerging role of the selective A2A agonist in pharmacologic stress testing. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17:494-7.
45. Iskandrian AS. Are the differences between adenosine and dipyridamole clinically relevant? J Nucl Cardiol 1996;3:281-3.
46. Nieman K, Rensing BJ, van Geuns RJ, et al. Non-invasive coronary angiography with multislice spiral computed tomography: impact of heart rate. Heart 2002;88:470-4. (Pubitemid 35221956)
47. Matt D, Scheffel H, Leschka S, et al. Dual-source CT coronary angiography: image quality, mean heart rate, and heart rate variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:567-73. (Pubitemid 47328537)
48. 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. (Pubitemid 34262671)
49. Rogers IS, Cury RC, Blankstein R, et al. Comparison of postprocessing techniques for the detection of perfusion defects by cardiac computed tomography in patients presenting with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2010;4:258-66.
50. Hoffman JI. Transmural myocardial perfusion. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1987;29:429-64. (Pubitemid 17089933)
51. Nagel E, Lima JA, George RT, et al. Newer methods for noninvasive assessment of myocardial perfusion: cardiac magnetic resonance or cardiac computed tomography? JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2:656-60.
52. George RT, Bengel FM, Lardo AC. Coronary flow reserve by CT perfusion. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17:540-3.
53. Choi KM, Kim RJ, Gubernikoff G, et al. Transmural extent of acute myocardial infarction predicts long-term improvement in contractile function. Circulation 2001;104:1101-7. (Pubitemid 32830391)
54. 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. (Pubitemid 350126563)
55. Kitagawa K, George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, et al. Characterization and correction of beam-hardening artifacts during dynamic volume CT assessment of myocardial perfusion. Radiology 2010;256:111-18.
56. Hundley WG, Bluemke DA, Finn JP, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:2614-62.
57. White HD, Norris RM, Brown MA, et al. Left ventricular end-systolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction. Circulation 1987;76:44-51. (Pubitemid 17093191)
58. Juergens KU, Fischbach R. Left ventricular function studied with MDCT. Eur Radiol 2006;16:342-57. (Pubitemid 43153682)
59. 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. (Pubitemid 46324032)
60. Mendoza DD, Joshi SB, Weissman G, et al. Viability imaging by cardiac computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2010;4:83-91.
61. Brodoefel H, Klumpp B, Reimann A, et al. Late myocardial enhancement assessed by 64-MSCT in reperfused porcine myocardial infarction: diagnostic accuracy of lowdose CT protocols in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 2007;17:475-83. (Pubitemid 46140318)
62. 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. (Pubitemid 43803201)
63. 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.
64. Rodriguez-Granillo GA, Rosales MA, Baum S, et al. Early assessment of myocardial viability by the use of delayed enhancement computed tomography after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2:1072-81.
65. Paul JF, Wartski M, Caussin C, et al. Late defect on delayed contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT scans in the prediction of SPECT infarct size after reperfused acute myocardial infarction: initial experience. Radiology 2005;236:485-9. (Pubitemid 41023429)
66. Khan A, Nasir K, Khosa F, et al. Prospective gating with 320-MDCT angiography: effect of volume scan length on radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:407-11.
67. Botvinick EH. Current methods of pharmacologic stress testing and the potential advantages of new agents. J Nucl Med Technol 2009;37:14-25.
68. Roobottom CA, Mitchell G, Morgan-Hughes G. Radiation-reduction strategies in cardiac computed tomographic angiography. Clinical Radiology 2010;65:859-67.
69. Bokhari S, Ficaro EP, McCallister BD Jr. Adenosine stress protocols for myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:415-16. (Pubitemid 46840301)
70. Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, et al. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med 2009;361:849-57.
71. Achenbach S, Marwan M, Ropers D, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 mSv using prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition. Eur Heart J 2010;31:340-6.
72. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA 2009;301:500-7.
73. Radiation Protection Number 154. European Guidance on Estimating Population Doses from Medical X-ray Procedures. Health Protection Agency, 2008.
74. Christner JA, Kofler JM, McCollough CH. Estimating effective dose for CT using dose-length product compared with using organ doses: consequences of adopting International Commission on Radiological Protection publication 103 or dual-energy scanning. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:881-9.
75. Huda W, Tipnis S, Sterzik A, et al. Computing effective dose in cardiac CT. Phys Med Biol 2010;55:3675-84.
76. Einstein AJ, Elliston CD, Arai AE, et al. Radiation dose from single-heartbeat coronary CT angiography performed with a 320-detector row volume scanner. Radiology 2010;254:698-706.
77. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography - an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277-84. (Pubitemid 350190758)
78. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007;298:317-23. (Pubitemid 47080486)
79. Faletra FF, D'Angeli I, Klersy C, et al. Estimates of lifetime attributable risk of cancer after a single radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomographic coronary angiography. Heart 2010;96:927-32.
80. Martin CJ. Effective dose: how should it be applied to medical exposures? Br J Radiol 2007;80:639-47.
81. Rixe J, Conradi G, Rolf A, et al. Radiation dose exposure of computed tomography coronary angiography: comparison of dual-source, 16-slice and 64-slice CT. Heart 2009;95:1337-42.
82. Machaalany J, Yam Y, Ruddy TD, et al. Potential clinical and economic consequences of noncardiac incidental findings on cardiac computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:1533-41.
83. Kim TJ, Han D, Jin KN, et al. Lung cancer detected at cardiac CT: Prevalence, clinicoradiologic features, and importance of full-field-of-view images. Radiology 2010;250:369-78.
84. Schonenberger E, Schnapauff D, Teige F, et al. Patient acceptance of noninvasive and invasive coronary angiography. PLoS One 2007;2:e246.
85. Stolzmann P, Alkadhi H, Scheffel H, et al. Image fusion of coronary CT angiography and cardiac perfusion MRI: a pilot study. Eur Radiol 2010;20:1174-9.
86. Stoll M, Quentin M, Molojavyi A, et al. Spatial heterogeneity of myocardial perfusion predicts local potassium channel expression and action potential duration. Cardiovasc Res 2008;77:489-96. (Pubitemid 351197660)