Subtraction Coronary CT Angiography for Calcified Lesions

Cardiology Clinics

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 93-102

  Yoshioka, Kunihiro ^a   Tanaka, Ryoichi ^a   Muranaka, Kenta ^a  

^a IWATE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Angiography; Computed tomography; Coronary artery; Subtraction

Indexed keywords

AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; CASE REPORT; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY CALCIFICATION; CORONARY STENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURES; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SUBTRACTION CORONARY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY;

AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANGINA PECTORIS; ANGIOGRAPHY, DIGITAL SUBTRACTION; ARTIFACTS; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY STENOSIS; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FORECASTING; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIATION DOSAGE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; VASCULAR CALCIFICATION;

EID: 84856463207     PISSN: 07338651     EISSN: 15582264     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ccl.2011.10.004     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Vanhoenacker P.K., Heijenbrok-Kal M.H., Van Heste R., et al. Diagnostic performance of multidetector CT angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease: meta-analysis. Radiology 2007, 244:419-428.
2. Hamon M., Morello R., Riddell J.W., et al. Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography-meta-analysis. Radiology 2007, 245:720-731.
3. Janne d'Othée B., Siebert U., Cury R., et al. Asystematic review on diagnostic accuracy of CT-based detection of significant coronary artery disease. Eur J Radiol 2008, 65:449-461.
4. Mowatt G., Cummins E., Waugh N., et al. Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in the investigation of coronary artery disease. Health Technol Assess 2008, 12(17):iii-iiv. ix-143.
5. Stein P.D., Yaekoub A.Y., Matta F., et al. 64-slice CT for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 2008, 121:715-725.
6. 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.
7. Miller J.M., Rochitte C.E., Dewey M., et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. NEngl J Med 2008, 359:2324-2336.
8. Budoff M.J., Dowe D., Jollis J.G., et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial. JAm Coll Cardiol 2008, 52:1724-1732.
9. Meijboom W.B., Meijs M.F., Schuijf J.D., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. JAm Coll Cardiol 2008, 52:2135-2144.
10. Mark D.B., Berman D.S., Budoff M.J., 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. Circulation 2010, 121(22):2509-2543.
11. Mori S., Endo M. Candidate image processing for real-time volumetric CT subtraction angiography. Eur J Radiol 2007, 61:335-341.
12. Yahyavi-Firouz-Abadi N., Wynn B.L., Rybicki F.J., et al. Steroid responsive large vessel vasculitis: application of whole-brain 320-detector row dynamic volume CT angiography and perfusion. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009, 30:1409-1411.
13. Hsiao E.M., Rybicki F.J., Steigner M. CT coronary angiography: 256-slice and 320-detector row scanners. Curr Cardiol Rep 2010, 12:68-75.
14. Rybicki F.J., Otero H.J., Steigner M.L., et al. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008, 24:535-546.
15. Steinger M.L., Otero H.J., Cai T., et al. Narrowing the phase window width in prospectively ECG-gated single heart beat 320-detector row coronary CT angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009, 25:85-90.
16. Dewey M., Zimmermann E., Deissenrieder F., et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography by 320-row computed tomography with lower radiation exposure and maintained diagnostic accuracy: comparison of results with cardiac catheterization ina head-to-head pilot investigation. Circulation 2009, 120:867-875.
17. Watanabe Y., Kashiwagi N., Yamada N., et al. Synchronized helical scan technique for the evaluation of postoperative cerebral aneurysms treated with cobalt-alloy clips. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008, 29:1071-1075.
18. Jinzaki M., Sato K., Tanami, et al. Novel method of displaying coronary CT angiography: Angiographic view. Circ J 2006, 70:1661-1662.
19. Abbara S., Arbab-Zadeh A., Callister T.Q., et al. SCCT guidelines for performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee. JCardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009, 3:190-204.
20. Taylor A.J., Cerqueira M., Hodgson J.M., et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. JCardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2010, 4(6):407. e1-33.
21. Yoshioka K., Tanaka R., Muranaka K., et al. Nippon Act Radiol 2010, (70 Suppl):s262-s263. [abstract], [in Japanese].
22. Bongartz G, Golding SJ, Jurik AG, etal. European guidelines for multislice computed tomography. Available at: Accessed August 18, 2011. http://www.msct.eu/CT_Quality_Criteria.htm#Download%2520the%25202004%2520CT%2520Quality%2520Criteria.
23. McCollough C.H., Primak A.N., Braun N., et al. Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiol Clin N Am 2009, 47:27-40.
24. 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, 196:407-411.
25. Hoe J., Toh K.H. First experience with 320-row multidetector CT coronary angiography with prospective electrocardiogram gating to reduce radiation dose. JCardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2009, 3:257-261.
26. Einstein A.J., Ellistion C.D., Arai A.E., et al. Radiation dose from single-heartbeat coronary CT angiography performed with a 320-detector row volume scanner. Radiology 2010, 254:698-706.
27. Leipsic J., LaBountry T.M., Heibron B., et al. Estimated radiation dose reduction using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in coronary CT angiography: the ERASIR study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010, 195:655-660.
28. Meyer B.C., Werncke T., Hopfenmuller W., et al. Dual energy CT of peripheral arteries: effect of automatic bone and plaque removal on image quality and grading of stenoses. Eur J Radiol 2008, 68:414-422.
29. Brockmann C., Jochum S., Sadick M., et al. Dual-energy CT angiography in peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2009, 32:630-637.
30. Yamamoto S., McWilliams J., Arellano C., et al. Dual-energy CT angiography and lower extremity arteries: dual-energy bone subtraction versus manual bone subtraction. Clin Radiol 2009, 64:1088-1096.
31. Uotani K., Watanabe Y., Higashi M., et al. Dual-energy CT head bone and plaque removal for quantification of calcified carotid stenosis: utility and comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Eur Radiol 2009, 19:2060-2065.
32. Deng K., Liu C., Ma R., et al. Clinical evaluation of dual-energy bone removal in CT angiography of the head and neck: comparison with conventional bone-subtraction CT angiography. Clin Radiol 2009, 64:534-541.
33. Thomas C., Korn A., Ketelsen D., et al. Automatic lumen segmentation in calcified plaques: dual-energy CT versus standard reconstructions in comparison with digital subtraction angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010, 194:1590-1595.
34. Zhang L.J., Wu S.Y., Niu J.B., et al. Dual-energy CT angiography in the evaluation of intracranial aneurysms: image quality, radiation dose, and comparison with 3D rotation digital subtraction angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010, 194:23-30.
35. Zhang L.J., Wu S.Y., Poon C.S., et al. Automatic bone removal dual-energy CT angiography for the evaluation of intracranial aneurysms. JComput Assist Tomogr 2010, 34:816-824.