Coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with chronic chest pain: Systematic review of evidence base and cost-effectiveness

Journal of Thoracic Imaging

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 277-288

  Nance, John William ^a,b   Bamberg, Fabian ^c   Joseph Schoepf, U ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

chronic stable chest pain; coronary computed tomography angiography; cost effectiveness; evidence based imaging

Indexed keywords

ANGINA PECTORIS; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CHRONIC PAIN; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORONARY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; EXERCISE ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; HUMAN; INCIDENTAL FINDING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGNOSIS; RADIATION DOSE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; STRESS ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; THORAX PAIN;

CHEST PAIN; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84865798753     PISSN: 08835993     EISSN: 15360237     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RTI.0b013e3182631c5c     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, 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. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1864-1894.
2. White CW, Wright CB, Doty DB, et al. Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriogram predict the physiologic importance of a coronary stenosis? N Engl J Med. 1984;310:819-824. (Pubitemid 14167762)
3. Hendel RC. Is computed tomography coronary angiography the most accurate and effective noninvasive imaging tool to evaluate patients with acute chest pain in the emergency department? CT coronary angiography is the most accurate and effective noninvasive imaging tool for evaluating patients presenting with chest pain to the emergency department: antagonist viewpoint. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2: 264-275; discussion 275.
4. Yokoyama I, Ohtake T, Momomura S, et al. Reduced coronary flow reserve in hypercholesterolemic patients without overt coronary stenosis. Circulation. 1996;94:3232-3238. (Pubitemid 26427492)
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;55:2663-2699.
6. Roger VL, Go AS, Lloyd-Jones DM, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2012 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2012;125:e2-e220.
7. Elveback LR, Connolly DC, Melton LJ III. Coronary heart disease in residents of Rochester, Minnesota. VII. Incidence, 1950 through 1982. Mayo Clin Proc. 1986;61:896-900. (Pubitemid 17181743)
8. Kannel WB, Feinleib M. Natural history of angina pectoris in the Framingham study. Prognosis and survival. Am J Cardiol. 1972;29:154-163.
9. Rouleau JL, Talajic M, Sussex B, et al. Myocardial infarction patients in the 1990s-their risk factors, stratification and survival in Canada: the Canadian Assessment of Myocardial Infarction (CAMI) Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27: 1119-1127. (Pubitemid 26117701)
10. Elveback LR, Connolly DC. Coronary heart disease in residents of Rochester, Minnesota. V. Prognosis of patients with coronary heart disease based on initial manifestation. Mayo Clin Proc. 1985;60:305-311. (Pubitemid 15065841)
11. Heidenreich PA, Trogdon JG, Khavjou OA, et al. Forecasting the future of cardiovascular disease in the United States: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011;123:933-944.
12. Gibbons RJ, Abrams J, Chatterjee K, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with chronic stable angina-summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina). Circulation. 2003;107:149-158. (Pubitemid 36070948)
13. Gibbons RJ, Chatterjee K, Daley J, et al. ACC/AHA/ACPASIM guidelines for the management of patients with chronic stable angina: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina). J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:2092-2197.
14. Chaitman BR, Bourassa MG, Davis K, et al. Angiographic prevalence of high-risk coronary artery disease in patient subsets (CASS). Circulation. 1981;64:360-367. (Pubitemid 11093427)
15. Diamond GA, Forrester JS. Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1979;300:1350-1358. (Pubitemid 9198112)
16. Morise AP, Haddad WJ, Beckner D. Development and validation of a clinical score to estimate the probability of coronary artery disease in men and women presenting with suspected coronary disease. Am J Med. 1997;102:350-356. (Pubitemid 27249101)
17. Pryor DB, Harrell FE Jr., Lee KL, et al. Estimating the likelihood of significant coronary artery disease. Am J Med. 1983;75:771-780. (Pubitemid 13023284)
18. Pryor DB, Shaw L, McCants CB, et al. Value of the history and physical in identifying patients at increased risk for coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118:81-90.
19. Sox HC Jr, Hickam DH, Marton KI, et al. Using the patient's history to estimate the probability of coronary artery disease: a comparison of primary care and referral practices. Am J Med. 1990;89:7-14.
20. Froelicher VF, Lehmann KG, Thomas R, et al. The electrocardiographic exercise test in a population with reduced workup bias: diagnostic performance, computerized interpretation, and multivariable prediction. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study in Health Services #016 (QUEXTA) Study Group. Quantitative Exercise Testing and Angiography. Ann Intern Med. 1998;128: 965-974.
21. Morise AP, Diamond GA. Comparison of the sensitivity and specificity of exercise electrocardiography in biased and unbiased populations of men and women. Am Heart J. 1995;130:741-747.
22. Arena R, Myers J, Williams MA, et al. Assessment of functional capacity in clinical and research settings: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Exercise, Rehabilitation, and Prevention of the Council on Clinical Cardiology and the Council on Cardiovascular Nursing. Circulation. 2007;116:329-343. (Pubitemid 47196569)
23. Gibbons RJ. Noninvasive diagnosis and prognosis assessment in chronic coronary artery disease: stress testing with and without imaging perspective. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;1:257-269; discussion 269.
24. Gibbons RJ, Balady GJ, Beasley JW, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for exercise testing: executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Exercise Testing). Circulation. 1997;96:345-354. (Pubitemid 27298443)
25. Borges-Neto S, Shaw LK, Tuttle RH, et al. Incremental prognostic power of single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 2005;95:182-188. (Pubitemid 40092082)
26. Rizzello V, Poldermans D, Schinkel AF, et al. Long term prognostic value of myocardial viability and ischaemia during dobutamine stress echocardiography in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy undergoing coronary revascularisation. Heart. 2006;92:239-244. (Pubitemid 43131969)
27. Hacker M, Jakobs T, Hack N, et al. Sixty-four slice spiral CT angiography does not predict the functional relevance of coronary artery stenoses in patients with stable angina. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:4-10. (Pubitemid 44888826)
28. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Van Mieghem C, et al. Adjunctive value of CT coronary angiography in the diagnostic work-up of patients with typical angina pectoris. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:1872-1878. (Pubitemid 47236645)
29. 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;49:1059-1067. (Pubitemid 46350899)
30. 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;48:2508-2514. (Pubitemid 44881213)
31. 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;94:1386-1393.
32. Sun Z, Ng KH. Diagnostic value of coronary CT angiography with prospective ECG-gating in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1007/s10554-011-0006-0.
33. 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 known 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;52:1724-1732.
34. Chow BJ, Freeman MR, Bowen JM, et al. Ontario multidetector computed tomographic coronary angiography study: field evaluation of diagnostic accuracy. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171:1021-1029.
35. Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:2135-2144.
36. Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2324-2336.
37. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Proposed decision memo for computed tomographic angiography [CMS web site]. Available at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/mcd/viewdraftdecisionmemo.asp?from2= viewdraftdecisionmemo. asp&id=206&. Accessed January 5, 2012.
38. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Decision memo for computed tomographic angiography (CAG-00385N) [CMS web site]. Available at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/mcd/view decisionmemo.asp?id-206. Accessed January 5, 2012.
39. Bamberg F, Sommer WH, Hoffmann V, et al. Meta-analysis and systematic review of the long-term predictive value of assessment of coronary atherosclerosis by contrast-enhanced coronary computed tomography angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:2426-2436.
40. Lee DS, Gona P, Albano I, et al. A systematic assessment of causes of death after heart failure onset in the community: impact of age at death, time period, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Circ Heart Fail. 2011;4:36-43.
41. Nance JW Jr, Bamberg F, Schoepf UJ, et al. Coronary atherosclerosis in African American and white patients with acute chest pain: characterization with coronary CT angiography. Radiology. 2011;260:373-380.
42. Min JK, Dunning A, Lin FY, et al. Age-and sex-related differences in all-cause mortality risk based on coronary computed tomography angiography findings results from the international multicenter CONFIRM (coronary CT angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: An international multicenter registry) of 23,854 patients without known coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:849-860.
43. Shaw LJ, Min JK, Narula J, et al. Sex differences in mortality associated with computed tomographic angiographic measurements of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary artery disease: an exploratory analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:473-481.
44. Van Werkhoven JM, Cademartiri F, Seitun S, et al. Diabetes: prognostic value of CT coronary angiography-comparison with a nondiabetic population. Radiology. 2010;256:83-92.
45. Abdulla J, Asferg C, Kofoed KF. Prognostic value of absence or presence of coronary artery disease determined by 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011; 27:413-420.
46. Hulten EA, Carbonaro S, Petrillo SP, et al. Prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1237-1247.
47. Chow BJ, Small G, Yam Y, et al. Incremental prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography in coronary artery disease using CONFIRM: COroNary computed tomography angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: an InteRnational Multicenter registry. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:463-472.
48. Lichtlen PR, Bargheer K, Wenzlaff P. Long-term prognosis of patients with angina-like chest pain and normal coronary angiographic findings. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25:1013-1018.
49. Shaw LJ, Iskandrian AE. Prognostic value of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11:171-185. (Pubitemid 38949912)
50. Metz LD, Beattie M, Hom R, et al. The prognostic value of normal exercise myocardial perfusion imaging and exercise echocardiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:227-237. (Pubitemid 46054393)
51. Emond M, Mock MB, Davis KB, et al. Long-term survival of medically treated patients in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) Registry. Circulation. 1994;90:2645-2657.
52. Woods KM, Fischer C, Cheezum MK, et al. The prognostic significance of coronary CT angiography. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2012;14:7-16.
53. Ahmadi N, Nabavi V, Hajsadeghi F, et al. Mortality incidence of patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease diagnosed by computed tomography angiography. Am J Cardiol. 2011;107:10-16.
54. Chow BJ, Wells GA, Chen L, et al. Prognostic value of 64-slice cardiac computed tomography severity of coronary artery disease, coronary atherosclerosis, and left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:1017-1028.
55. Min JK, Feignoux J, Treutenaere J, et al. The prognostic value of multidetector coronary CT angiography for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events: a multicenter observational cohort study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;26: 721-728.
56. Pundziute G, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:62-70. (Pubitemid 46026899)
57. Russo V, Zavalloni A, Bacchi Reggiani ML, et al. Incremental prognostic value of coronary CT angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:351-359.
58. van Werkhoven JM, Schuijf JD, Gaemperli O, et al. Incremental prognostic value of multi-slice computed tomography coronary angiography over coronary artery calcium scoring in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:2622-2629.
59. Min JK, Shaw LJ, Devereux RB, et al. Prognostic value of multidetector coronary computed tomographic angiography for prediction of all-cause mortality. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:1161-1170. (Pubitemid 47375010)
60. Kazmi MH, Small G, Sleiman L, et al. Determining patient prognosis using computed tomography coronary angiography. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2011;8:647-657.
61. Gopal A, Nasir K, Ahmadi N, et al. Cardiac computed tomographic angiography in an outpatient setting: an analysis of clinical outcomes over a 40-month period. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:90-95.
62. Hadamitzky M, Distler R, Meyer T, et al. Prognostic value of coronary computed tomographic angiography in comparison with calcium scoring and clinical risk scores. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:16-23.
63. Ostrom MP, Gopal A, Ahmadi N, et al. Mortality incidence and the severity of coronary atherosclerosis assessed by computed tomography angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1335-1343.
64. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Hendel RC, et al. Prognosis by coronary computed tomographic angiography: matched comparison with myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2008;2:93-101.
65. van Werkhoven JM, Schuijf JD, Gaemperli O, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography and gated singlephoton emission computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:623-632.
66. Hoffmann U, Bamberg F. Is computed tomography coronary angiography the most accurate and effective noninvasive imaging tool to evaluate patients with acute chest pain in the emergency department? CT coronary angiography is the most accurate and effective noninvasive imaging tool for evaluating patients presenting with chest pain to the emergency department. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:251-263; discussion 263.
67. Ladapo JA, Jaffer FA, Hoffmann U, et al. Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of coronary computed tomography angiography in the evaluation of patients with chest pain. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:2409-2422.
68. Min JK, Kang N, Shaw LJ, et al. Costs and clinical outcomes after coronary multidetector CT angiography in patients without known coronary artery disease: comparison to myocardial perfusion SPECT. Radiology. 2008;249:62-70.
69. Min JK, Shaw LJ, Berman DS, et al. Costs and clinical outcomes in individuals without known coronary artery disease undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography from an analysis of Medicare category III transaction codes. Am J Cardiol. 2008;102:672-678.
70. Shreibati JB, Baker LC, Hlatky MA. Association of coronary CT angiography or stress testing with subsequent utilization and spending among Medicare beneficiaries. JAMA. 2011; 306:2128-2136.
71. Min JK, Gilmore A, Budoff MJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of coronary CT angiography versus myocardial perfusion SPECT for evaluation of patients with chest pain and no known coronary artery disease. Radiology. 2010;254:801-808.
72. Karlsberg RP, Budoff MJ, Thomson LE, et al. Reduction in downstream test utilization following introduction of coronary computed tomography in a cardiology practice. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;26:359-366.
73. Nielsen LH, Markenvard J, Jensen JM, et al. Frontline diagnostic evaluation of patients suspected of angina by coronary computed tomography reduces downstream resource utilization when compared to conventional ischemia testing. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;27:813-823.
74. Genders TS, Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, et al. CT coronary angiography in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease: decision making from various perspectives in the face of uncertainty. Radiology. 2009;253:734-744.
75. Dorenkamp M, Bonaventura K, Sohns C, et al. Direct costs and cost-effectiveness of dual-source computed tomography and invasive coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease. Heart. 2012;98:460-467.
76. Ovrehus KA, Botker HE, Jensen JM, et al. Influence of coronary computed tomographic angiography on patient treatment and prognosis in patients with suspected stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 2011;107:1473-1479.
77. Menon M, Lesser JR, Hara H, et al. Multidetector CT coronary angiography for patient triage to invasive coronary angiography: Performance and cost in ambulatory patients with equivocal or suspected inaccurate noninvasive stress tests. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;73:497-502.
78. Patel N, Pal RS, Flores F, et al. Utility of cardiac computed tomography angiography to exclude clinically significant obstructive coronary artery disease in patients after myocardial perfusion imaging. Am J Cardiol. 2012;109:165-168.
79. Lee CI, Tsai EB, Sigal BM, et al. Incidental extracardiac findings at coronary CT: clinical and economic impact. Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:1531-1538.
80. 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.
81. Coles DR, Smail MA, Negus IS, et al. Comparison of radiation doses from multislice computed tomography coronary angiography and conventional diagnostic angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:1840-1845.
82. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA. 2007;298:317-323. (Pubitemid 47080486)
83. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA. 2009;301:500-507.
84. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AAPM Position Statement on Radiation Risks from Medical Imaging Procedures [AAPM web site]. December 13, 2011. Available at: http://www.aapm.org/org/policies/details.asp? id=318&type= PP¤t=true. Accessed February 5, 2012.
85. Zondervan R, Hahn P, Sadow C, et al. Radiation from CT scanning young adults-what are the real risks? [Abstract]. Presented May 1, 2012 at the American Roentgen Ray Society 2012 Annual Meeting.
86. Hausleiter J, Martinoff S, Hadamitzky M, et al. Image quality and radiation exposure with a low tube voltage protocol for coronary CT angiography results of the PROTECTION II Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:1113-1123.
87. Fink C, Krissak R, Henzler T, et al. Radiation dose at coronary CT angiography: second-generation dual-source CT versus single-source 64-MDCT and first-generation dualsource CT. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:W550-W557.
88. Raff GL, Chinnaiyan KM, Share DA, et al. Radiation dose from cardiac computed tomography before and after implementation of radiation dose-reduction techniques. JAMA. 2009;301:2340-2348.
89. Min JK, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, et al. Rationale and design of the DeFACTO (Determination of Fractional Flow Reserve by Anatomic Computed Tomographic AngiOgraphy) study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5:301-309.
90. Min JK, Lin FY, Dunning AM, et al. Incremental prognostic significance of left ventricular dysfunction to coronary artery disease detection by 64-detector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for the prediction of all-cause mortality: results from a two-centre study of 5330 patients. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:1212-1219.
91. Bastarrika G, Lee YS, Huda W, et al. CT of coronary artery disease. Radiology. 2009;253:317-338.
92. Bastarrika G, Ramos-Duran L, Rosenblum MA, et al. Adenosine-stress dynamic myocardial CT perfusion imaging: initial clinical experience. Invest Radiol. 2010;45:306-313.
93. Koonce J, Schmidt B, Weininger M, et al. Quantitative analysis of myocardial iodine concentration during stress and rest based on dual-energy CT: comparison with cardiac perfusion MRI [Abstract]. Presented November 29, 2010 at the Radiological Society of North America 2010 Annual Meeting.
94. American College of Radiology Imaging Network. ACRIN 4701 RESCUE [ACRIN web site]. Available at: http://www.acrin.org/RESCUE-protocol.aspx. Accessed January 5, 2012.
95. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. PROspective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE) [clinicaltrials.gov web site]. 2010. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01174550. Accessed January 5, 2012.