Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Update on Computed Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging

  • Cardiac Computed Tomography (TC Villines, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography is a well-validated non-invasive technique for accurate and expedient diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). However, a limitation of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) is its limited capability to identify physiologically significant stenoses, which may eventuate the need for further functional testing. Stress CT myocardial perfusion imaging (CT-MPI) is an emerging technique that has the ability to identify flow-limiting stenoses.

Recent Findings

The combination of CCTA coronary and CT-MPI has transformed the modality from a tool to assess anatomy and morphology to a modality capable of simultaneous assessment of coronary stenoses and their physiologic significance. A growing number of studies have demonstrated the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of CT-MPI in comparison to a number of reference standard modalities for CAD diagnosis, including single-photon emission CT, cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging, and invasive coronary angiography with and without fractional flow-reserve testing.

Summary

While there is still a need for consensus regarding acquisition techniques as well as analysis and interpretation of CT-MPI, with further validation, it is likely to become a powerful adjunctive tool to CCTA in the management of patients with suspected coronary disease.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Hoffmann U, Truong QA, Schoenfeld DA, et al. Coronary CT angiography versus standard evaluation in acute chest pain. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:299–308.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Hoffmann U, Bamberg F, Chae CU, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography for early triage of patients with acute chest pain: the ROMICAT (Rule Out Myocardial Infarction using Computer Assisted Tomography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1642–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Hulten EA, Carbonaro S, Petrillo SP, Mitchell JD, Villines TC. Prognostic value of cardiac computed tomography angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1237–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cho I, Chang HJ, Sung JM, et al. Coronary computed tomographic angiography and risk of all-cause mortality and nonfatal myocardial infarction in subjects without chest pain syndrome from the CONFIRM Registry (coronary CT angiography evaluation for clinical outcomes: an international multicenter registry). Circulation. 2012;126:304–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hecht HS, Achenbach S, Kondo T, Narula J. High-risk plaque features on coronary CT angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2015;8:1336–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:991–1001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Koo BK, Erglis A, Doh JH, et al. Diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1989–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gonzalez JA, Lipinski MJ, Flors L, Shaw PW, Kramer CM, Salerno M. Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomography angiography, computed tomography perfusion, and computed tomography-fractional flow reserve in functional myocardial ischemia assessment versus invasive fractional flow reserve. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:1469–78. Recent meta analysis of available clinical trials comparing different types of CT coronary imaging with the gold standard of invasive angiography with FFR. This study demonstrates there is diagnostic improvement, mainly mediated by a significant increase in specificity, with the addition of CT perfusion imaging to CCTA.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gerber BL, Belge B, Legros GJ, et al. Characterization of acute and chronic myocardial infarcts by multidetector computed tomography: comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2006;113:823–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mor-Avi V, Lodato JA, Kachenoura N, et al. Quantitative three-dimensional evaluation of myocardial perfusion during regadenoson stress using multidetector computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2012;36:443–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Siemers PT, Higgins CB, Schmidt W, Ashburn W, Hagan P. Detection, quantitation and contrast enhancement of myocardial infarction utilizing computerized axial tomography: comparison with histochemical staining and 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging. Investig Radiol. 1978;13:103–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Iwasaki K, Matsumoto T. Myocardial perfusion defect in patients with coronary artery disease demonstrated by 64-multidetector computed tomography at rest. Clin Cardiol. 2011;34:454–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kachenoura N, Gaspar T, Lodato JA, et al. Combined assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion using multidetector computed tomography for the evaluation of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 2009;103:1487–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gupta M, Kadakia J, Jug B, Mao SS, Budoff MJ. Detection and quantification of myocardial perfusion defects by resting single-phase 64-slice cardiac computed tomography angiography compared with SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. Coron Artery Dis. 2013;24:290–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kachenoura N, Lodato JA, Gaspar T, et al. Value of multidetector computed tomography evaluation of myocardial perfusion in the assessment of ischemic heart disease: comparison with nuclear perfusion imaging. Eur Radiol. 2009;19:1897–905.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bamberg F, Marcus RP, Becker A, et al. Dynamic myocardial CT perfusion imaging for evaluation of myocardial ischemia as determined by MR imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2014;7:267–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pursnani A, Lee AM, Mayrhofer T, et al. Early resting myocardial computed tomography perfusion for the detection of acute coronary syndrome in patients with coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8, e002404. Recently published subanalysis of the well-known CCTA trial ROMI-CAT I trial which analysis resting perfusion and found it comparable to SPECT for the detection of obstructive coronary disease. It demonstrates.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tamarappoo BK, Dey D, Nakazato R, et al. Comparison of the extent and severity of myocardial perfusion defects measured by CT coronary angiography and SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2010;3:1010–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ko BS, Cameron JD, Leung M, et al. Combined CT coronary angiography and stress myocardial perfusion imaging for hemodynamically significant stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: a comparison with fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2012;5:1097–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Patel AR, Antkowiak PF, Nandalur KR, et al. Assessment of advanced coronary artery disease: advantages of quantitative cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:561–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Ho KT, Chua KC, Klotz E, Panknin C. Stress and rest dynamic myocardial perfusion imaging by evaluation of complete time-attenuation curves with dual-source CT. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2010;3:811–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Biglands JD, Magee DR, Sourbron SP, Plein S, Greenwood JP, Radjenovic A. Comparison of the diagnostic performance of four quantitative myocardial perfusion estimation methods used in cardiac MR imaging: CE-MARC Substudy. Radiology. 2015;275:393–402.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Kachenoura N, Veronesi F, Lodato JA, et al. Volumetric quantification of myocardial perfusion using analysis of multi-detector computed tomography 3D datasets: comparison with nuclear perfusion imaging. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:337–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rief M, Zimmermann E, Stenzel F, et al. Computed tomography angiography and myocardial computed tomography perfusion in patients with coronary stents: prospective intraindividual comparison with conventional coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1476–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yang DH, Kim YH, Roh JH, et al. Stress myocardial perfusion CT in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease: visual and quantitative analysis—validation by using fractional flow reserve. Radiology. 2015;276:715–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bettencourt N, Chiribiri A, Schuster A, et al. Direct comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance and multidetector computed tomography stress-rest perfusion imaging for detection of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1099–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, et al. Computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging with 320-row detector computed tomography accurately detects myocardial ischemia in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:333–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rochitte CE, George RT, Chen MY, et al. Computed tomography angiography and perfusion to assess coronary artery stenosis causing perfusion defects by single photon emission computed tomography: the CORE320 study. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1120–30. Large multicenter trial directly comparing CT perfusion imaging to SPECT in patients prior to coronary angiography. CCTA with CT perfusion demonstrated excellent diagnostic utility (AUC of 0.9 or greater) in patients with and without a history of previous myocardial infarction.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Magalhaes TA, Kishi S, George RT, et al. Combined coronary angiography and myocardial perfusion by computed tomography in the identification of flow-limiting stenosis—the CORE320 study: an integrated analysis of CT coronary angiography and myocardial perfusion. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2015;9:438–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. George RT, Mehra VC, Chen MY, et al. Myocardial CT perfusion imaging and SPECT for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a head-to-head comparison from the CORE320 multicenter diagnostic performance study. Radiology. 2014;272:407–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Feuchtner G, Goetti R, Plass A, et al. Adenosine stress high-pitch 128-slice dual-source myocardial computed tomography perfusion for imaging of reversible myocardial ischemia: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:540–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cury RC, Magalhaes TA, Paladino AT, et al. Dipyridamole stress and rest transmural myocardial perfusion ratio evaluation by 64 detector-row computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5:443–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. So A, Wisenberg G, Islam A, et al. Non-invasive assessment of functionally relevant coronary artery stenoses with quantitative CT perfusion: preliminary clinical experiences. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:39–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bettencourt N, Ferreira ND, Leite D, et al. CAD detection in patients with intermediate-high pre-test probability: low-dose CT delayed enhancement detects ischemic myocardial scar with moderate accuracy but does not improve performance of a stress-rest CT perfusion protocol. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2013;6:1062–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kim SM, Chang SA, Shin W, Choe YH. Dual-energy CT perfusion during pharmacologic stress for the assessment of myocardial perfusion defects using a second-generation dual-source CT: a comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2014;38:44–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Ko SM, Choi JW, Song MG, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging using adenosine-induced stress dual-energy computed tomography of the heart: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and conventional coronary angiography. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:26–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ko SM, Choi JW, Hwang HK, Song MG, Shin JK, Chee HK. Diagnostic performance of combined noninvasive anatomic and functional assessment with dual-source CT and adenosine-induced stress dual-energy CT for detection of significant coronary stenosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:512–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Ladeiras-Lopes R, Bettencourt N, Ferreira N et al. CT myocardial perfusion and coronary CT angiography: influence of coronary calcium on a stress-rest protocol. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2016. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2016.01.013.

  44. Nasis A, Ko BS, Leung MC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of combined coronary angiography and adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging using 320-detector computed tomography: pilot study. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:1812–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Rocha-Filho JA, Blankstein R, Shturman LD, et al. Incremental value of adenosine-induced stress myocardial perfusion imaging with dual-source CT at cardiac CT angiography. Radiology. 2010;254:410–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Bamberg F, Becker A, Schwarz F, et al. Detection of hemodynamically significant coronary artery stenosis: incremental diagnostic value of dynamic CT-based myocardial perfusion imaging. Radiology. 2011;260:689–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Greif M, von Ziegler F, Bamberg F, et al. CT stress perfusion imaging for detection of haemodynamically relevant coronary stenosis as defined by FFR. Heart. 2013;99:1004–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Huber AM, Leber V, Gramer BM, et al. Myocardium: dynamic versus single-shot CT perfusion imaging. Radiology. 2013;269:378–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ko BS, Cameron JD, Meredith IT, et al. Computed tomography stress myocardial perfusion imaging in patients considered for revascularization: a comparison with fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:67–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Rossi A, Dharampal A, Wragg A, et al. Diagnostic performance of hyperaemic myocardial blood flow index obtained by dynamic computed tomography: does it predict functionally significant coronary lesions? Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15:85–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Wong DT, Ko BS, Cameron JD, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of combined assessment using adenosine stress computed tomography perfusion + computed tomography angiography with transluminal attenuation gradient + computed tomography angiography against invasive fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1904–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Kim SM, Choi JH, Chang SA, Choe YH. Additional value of adenosine-stress dynamic CT myocardial perfusion imaging in the reclassification of severity of coronary artery stenosis at coronary CT angiography. Clin Radiol. 2013;68:e659–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Schaap J, de Groot JA, Nieman K, et al. Added value of hybrid myocardial perfusion SPECT and CT coronary angiography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15:1281–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Nieman K, Cury RC, Ferencik M, et al. Differentiation of recent and chronic myocardial infarction by cardiac computed tomography. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98:303–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Sato A, Nozato T, Hikita H, et al. Prognostic value of myocardial contrast delayed enhancement with 64-slice multidetector computed tomography after acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:730–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Patel AR, Bhave NM, Mor-Avi V. Myocardial perfusion imaging with cardiac computed tomography: state of the art. J Cardiovasc Transl Res. 2013;6:695–707.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Machida H, Tanaka I, Fukui R, et al. Current and novel imaging techniques in coronary CT. Radiogr: Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am, Inc. 2015;35:991–1010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Flohr TG, De Cecco CN, Schmidt B, Wang R, Schoepf UJ, Meinel FG. Computed tomographic assessment of coronary artery disease: state-of-the-art imaging techniques. Radiol Clin N Am. 2015;53:271–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. So A, Hsieh J, Narayanan S, et al. Dual-energy CT and its potential use for quantitative myocardial CT perfusion. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2012;6:308–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Ko SM, Park JH, Hwang HK, Song MG. Direct comparison of stress- and rest-dual-energy computed tomography for detection of myocardial perfusion defect. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;30 Suppl 1:41–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Carrascosa PM, Cury RC, Deviggiano A, et al. Comparison of myocardial perfusion evaluation with single versus dual-energy CT and effect of beam-hardening artifacts. Acad Radiol. 2015;22:591–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Tanami Y, Ikeda E, Jinzaki M, et al. Computed tomographic attenuation value of coronary atherosclerotic plaques with different tube voltage: an ex vivo study. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34:58–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Obaid DR, Calvert PA, Gopalan D, et al. Dual-energy computed tomography imaging to determine atherosclerotic plaque composition: a prospective study with tissue validation. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8:230–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Bhave NM, Freed BH, Yodwut C, et al. Considerations when measuring myocardial perfusion reserve by cardiovascular magnetic resonance using regadenoson. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson: Off J Soc Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012;14:89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Feger S, Rief M, Zimmermann E, et al. Patient satisfaction with coronary CT angiography, myocardial CT perfusion, myocardial perfusion MRI, SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging and conventional coronary angiography. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:2115–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Rodriguez-Granillo GA, Rosales MA, Degrossi E, Rodriguez AE. Signal density of left ventricular myocardial segments and impact of beam hardening artifact: implications for myocardial perfusion assessment by multidetector CT coronary angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;26:345–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Stenner P, Schmidt B, Allmendinger T, Flohr T, Kachelrie M. Dynamic iterative beam hardening correction (DIBHC) in myocardial perfusion imaging using contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Investig Radiol. 2010;45:314–23.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Rodriguez-Granillo GA, Carrascosa P, Cipriano S, et al. Beam hardening artifact reduction using dual energy computed tomography: implications for myocardial perfusion studies. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2015;5:79–85.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Bhave NM, Mor-Avi V, Kachenoura N, et al. Analysis of myocardial perfusion from vasodilator stress computed tomography: does improvement in image quality by iterative reconstruction lead to improved diagnostic accuracy? J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8:238–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Gramer BM, Muenzel D, Leber V, et al. Impact of iterative reconstruction on CNR and SNR in dynamic myocardial perfusion imaging in an animal model. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:2654–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, University of Chicago Medicine, 5758 South Maryland Avenue, MC9067, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA

    Amita Singh, Victor Mor-Avi & Amit R. Patel

  2. Department of Radiology, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA

    Amit R. Patel

Authors
  1. Amita Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Victor Mor-Avi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amit R. Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amit R. Patel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

AS, VMA, and ARP declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All reported studies/experiments with human or animal subjects performed by the authors have been previously published and were in compliance with all applicable ethical standards (including the Helsinki declaration and its amendments, institutional/national research committee standards, and international/national/institutional guidelines).

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Cardiac Computed Tomography

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singh, A., Mor-Avi, V. & Patel, A.R. Update on Computed Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging. Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep 9, 19 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-016-9381-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-016-9381-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation