Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Myocardial Function and Viability

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Atlas of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography

  • 1167 Accesses

Abstract

Information on cardiac function is of substantial value in the assessment of patients suffering from a variety of cardiac diseases. Although cardiovascular MRI is considered the current standard of reference for functional imaging, information on global and regional myocardial function is routinely obtained by echocardiography or by levocardiography. The first CT approaches toward the assessment of cardiac function were developed as early as the late 1970s [1]. Cross-sectional imaging techniques like the dynamic spatial reconstructor [2] or electron beam CT [3] were successfully evaluated for their ability to visualize cardiac function. For all of these techniques, evaluation of left ventricular volumes, wall motion abnormalities, and contrast enhancement patterns was shown to be feasible. For several reasons, however, none of these techniques was considered a routine clinical tool.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Harell GS, Guthaner DF, Breiman RS, Morehouse CC, Seppi EJ, Marshall WH Jr, Wexler L. Stop-action cardiac computed tomography. Radiology. 1977;123:515–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ritman EL, Robb RA, Johnson SA, Chevalier PA, Gilbert BK, Greenleaf JF, et al. Quantitative imaging of the structure and function of the heart, lungs, and circulation. Mayo Clin Proc. 1978;53:3–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lipton MJ, Farmer DW, Killebrew EJ, Bouchard A, Dean PB, Ringertz HG, Higgins CB. Regional myocardial dysfunction: evaluation of patients with prior myocardial infarction with fast CT. Radiology. 1985;157:735–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Papavassiliu T, Kuhl HP, Schroder M, Suselbeck T, Bondarenko O, Bohm CK, et al. Effect of endocardial trabeculae on left ventricular measurements and measurement reproducibility at cardiovascular MR imaging. Radiology. 2005;236:57–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lin FY, Devereux RB, Roman MJ, Meng J, Jow VM, Jacobs A, et al. Cardiac chamber volumes, function, and mass as determined by 64-multidetector row computed tomography: mean values among healthy adults free of hypertension and obesity. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;1:782–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mahnken AH, Klotz E, Hennemuth A, Jung B, Koos R, Wildberger JE, Gunther RW. Measurement of cardiac output from a test-bolus injection in multislice computed tomography. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:2498–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Stolzmann P, Scheffel H, Leschka S, Schertler T, Frauenfelder T, Kaufmann PA, et al. Reference values for quantitative left ventricular and left atrial measurements in cardiac computed tomography. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1625–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stojanovska J, Cronin P, Patel S, Gross BH, Oral H, Chughtai K, Kazerooni EA. Reference normal absolute and indexed values from ECG-gated MDCT: left atrial volume, function, and diameter. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:631–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jensen CJ, Jochims M, Hunold P, Forsting M, Barkhausen J, Sabin GV, et al. Assessment of left ventricular function and mass in dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography: influence of beta-blockers on left ventricular function: comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol. 2010;74:484–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bak SH, Ko SM, Jeon HJ, Yang HS, Hwang HK, Song MG. Assessment of global left ventricular function with dual-source computed tomography in patients with valvular heart disease. Acta Radiol. 2012;53:270–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Greupner J, Zimmermann E, Grohmann A, Dubel HP, Althoff TF, Borges AC, et al. Head-to-head comparison of left ventricular function assessment with 64-row computed tomography, biplane left cineventriculography, and both 2- and 3-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging as the reference standard. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1897–907.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fuchs A, Kühl JT, Lønborg J, Engstrøm T, Vejlstrup N, Køber L, Kofoed KF. Automated assessment of heart chamber volumes and function in patients with previous myocardial infarction using multidetector computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2012;6:325–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Maffei E, Messalli G, Martini C, Nieman K, Catalano O, Rossi A, et al. Left and right ventricle assessment with cardiac CT: validation study vs. cardiac MR. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:1041–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Plumhans C, Mühlenbruch G, Rapaee A, Sim KH, Seyfarth T, Günther RW, Mahnken AH. Assessment of global right ventricular function on 64-MDCT compared with MRI. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:1358–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jensen CJ, Wolf A, Eberle HC, Forsting M, Nassenstein K, Lauenstein TC, et al. Accuracy and variability of right ventricular volumes and mass assessed by dual-source computed tomography: influence of slice orientation in comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:2492–502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Huang X, Pu X, Dou R, Guo X, Yan Z, Zhang Z, et al. Assessment of right ventricular function with 320-slice volume cardiac CT: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;28(Suppl 2):87–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, American Heart Association Writing Group on Myocardial Segmentation and Registration for Cardiac Imaging, 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Salm LP, Schuijf JD, de Roos A, Lamb HJ, Vliegen HW, Jukema JW, et al. Global and regional left ventricular function assessment with 16-detector row CT: comparison with echocardiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2006;7:308–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sarwar A, Shapiro MD, Nasir K, Nieman K, Nomura CH, Brady TJ, Cury RC. Evaluating global and regional left ventricular function in patients with reperfused acute myocardial infarction by 64-slice multidetector CT: a comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:170–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lüders F, Fischbach R, Seifarth H, Wessling J, Heindel W, Juergens KU. Dual-source computed tomography: effect on regional and global left ventricular function assessment compared to magnetic resonance imaging [German]. Rofo. 2009;181:962–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nakazato R, Tamarappoo BK, Smith TW, Cheng VY, Dey D, Shmilovich H, et al. Assessment of left ventricular regional wall motion and ejection fraction with low-radiation dose helical dual-source CT: comparison to two-dimensional echocardiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5:149–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nasis A, Moir S, Seneviratne SK, Cameron JD, Mottram PM. Assessment of left ventricular volumes, ejection fraction and regional wall motion with retrospective electrocardiogram triggered 320-detector computed tomography: a comparison with 2D-echocardiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;28:955–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Pellikka PA, American Society of Echocardiography’s Nomenclature and Standards Committee; Task Force on Chamber Quantification; American College of Cardiology Echocardiography Committee; American Heart Association; European Association of Echocardiography, European Society of Cardiology, et al. Recommendations for chamber quantification. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2006;7:79–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gosalia A, Haramati LB, Sheth MP, Spindola-Franco H. CT detection of acute myocardial infarction. Am J Roentgenol. 2004;182:1563–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Wildberger JE, Spuentrup E, Buecker A, et al. Assessment of myocardial viability in reperfused acute myocardial infarction using 16-slice computed tomography in comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45:2042–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Francone M, Carbone I, Danti M, Lanciotti K, Cavacece M, Mirabelli F, et al. ECG-gated multi-detector row spiral CT in the assessment of myocardial infarction: correlation with non-invasive angiographic findings. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:15–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sanz J, Weeks D, Nikolaou K, Sirol M, Rius T, Rajagopalan S, et al. Detection of healed myocardial infarction with multidetector-row computed tomography and comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance delayed hyperenhancement. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98:149–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Henneman MM, Schuijf JD, Dibbets-Schneider P, Stokkel MP, van der Geest RJ, van der Wall EE, Bax JJ. Comparison of multislice computed tomography to gated single-photon emission computed tomography for imaging of healed myocardial infarcts. Am J Cardiol. 2008;101:144–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rubinshtein R, Miller TD, Williamson EE, Kirsch J, Gibbons RJ, Primak AN, et al. Detection of myocardial infarction by dual-source coronary computed tomography angiography using quantitated myocardial scintigraphy as the reference standard. Heart. 2009;95:1419–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mohlenkamp S, Lerman LO, Lerman A, Behrenbeck TR, Katusic ZS, Sheedy PF 2nd, Ritman EL. Minimally invasive evaluation of coronary microvascular function by electron beam computed tomography. Circulation. 2000;102:2411–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Choi KM, Kim RJ, Gubernikoff G, Vargas JD, Parker M, Judd RM. Transmural extent of acute myocardial infarction predicts long-term improvement in contractile function. Circulation. 2001;104:1101–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim RJ, Wu E, Rafael A, Chen EL, Parker MA, Simonetti O, et al. The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1445–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Koyama Y, Matsuoka H, Mochizuki T, Higashino H, Kawakami H, Nakata S, et al. Assessment of reperfused acute myocardial infarction with two-phase contrast-enhanced helical CT: prediction of left ventricular function and wall thickness. Radiology. 2005;235:804–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Marburg University Hospital, Baldingerstrasse, D-35043, Marburg, Germany

    Andreas H. Mahnken

Authors
  1. Andreas H. Mahnken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas H. Mahnken .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute, UCLA, Torrance, California, USA

    Matthew J. Budoff

  2. Department of Cardiology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany

    Stephan S. Achenbach

  3. Mount Sinai Hospital, New York City, New York, USA

    Harvey S. Hecht

  4. Department of Cardiology , Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, New York, USA

    Jagat Narula

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mahnken, A.H. (2018). Myocardial Function and Viability. In: Budoff, M., Achenbach, S., Hecht, H., Narula, J. (eds) Atlas of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7357-1_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7357-1_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-7356-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-7357-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation