Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 49–57 | Cite as

Quantification of the myocardial area at risk using coronary CT angiography and Voronoi algorithm-based myocardial segmentation

  • Akira KurataEmail author
  • Atsushi Kono
  • Tsuyoshi Sakamoto
  • Teruhito Kido
  • Teruhito Mochizuki
  • Hiroshi Higashino
  • Mitsunori Abe
  • Adriaan Coenen
  • Raluca G. Saru-Chelu
  • Pim J. de Feyter
  • Gabriel P. Krestin
  • Koen Nieman
Cardiac

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to estimate the myocardial area at risk (MAAR) using coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) and Voronoi algorithm-based myocardial segmentation in comparison with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT).

Methods

Thirty-four patients with coronary artery disease underwent 128-slice coronary CTA, stress/rest thallium-201 SPECT, and coronary angiography (CAG). CTA-based MAAR was defined as the sum of all CAG stenosis (>50 %) related territories (the ratio of the left ventricular volume). Using automated quantification software (17-segment model, 5-point scale), SPECT-based MAAR was defined as the number of segments with a score above zero as compared to the total 17 segments by summed stress score (SSS), difference (SDS) score map, and comprehensive SPECT interpretation with either SSS or SDS best correlating CAG findings (SSS/SDS). Results were compared using Pearson's correlation coefficient.

Results

Forty-nine stenoses were observed in 102 major coronary territories. Mean value of CTA-based MAAR was 28.3 ± 14.0 %. SSS-based, SDS-based, and SSS/SDS-based MAAR was 30.1 ± 6.1 %, 20.1 ± 15.8 %, and 26.8 ± 15.7 %, respectively. CTA-based MAAR was significantly related to SPECT-based MAAR (r = 0.531 for SSS; r = 0.494 for SDS; r = 0.814 for SSS/SDS; P < 0.05 in each).

Conclusions

CTA-based Voronoi algorithm myocardial segmentation reliably quantifies SPECT-based MAAR.

Key points

Voronoi algorithm allows for three-dimensional myocardial segmentation of coronary CT angiography

Stenosis-related CT myocardial territories correlate to SPECT based area at risk

CT angiography myocardial segmentation may assist in clinical decision-making

Keywords

Area at risk Coronary artery disease CT angiography Computed tomography Myocardial ischemia 

Abbreviations

CABG

Coronary artery bypass grafting

CAD

Coronary artery disease

CTA

CT angiography

LV

Left ventricle (ventricular)

MDCT

Multidetector-row computed tomography

MPI

Myocardial perfusion imaging

MAAR

Myocardial area at risk

PCI

Percutaneous coronary intervention

QCA

Quantitative coronary analysis

SPECT

Single-photon emission computed tomography

3-D

Three-dimensional

Notes

Acknowledgements

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Koen Nieman. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board. Methodology: retrospective observational multicenter study.

References

  1. 1.
    Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS (2003) Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 107:2900–2907PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Di Carli MF, Murthy VL (2011) Cardiac PET/CT for the evaluation of known or suspected coronary artery disease. Radiographics 31:1239–1254PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gould KL, Johnson NP, Bateman TM et al (2013) Anatomic versus physiologic assessment of coronary artery disease: role of coronary flow reserve, fractional flow reserve, and positron emission tomography imaging in revascularization decision-making. J Am Coll Cardiol 62:1639–1653PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ishida N, Sakuma H, Motoyasu M et al (2003) Noninfarcted myocardium: correlation between dynamic first-pass contrast-enhanced myocardial MR imaging and quantitative coronary angiography. Radiology 229:209–216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schwitter J, Wacker CM, van Rossum AC et al (2008) MR-IMPACT: comparison of perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance with single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease in a multicentre, multivendor, randomized trial. Eur Heart J 2:480–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Voigt JU, Exner B, Schmiedehausen K, et al. Strain-rate imaging during dobutamine stress echocardiography provides objective evidence of inducible ischemia. Circulation 107:2120–2126Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nakajima K, Matsuo S, Okuda K, Wakabayashi H, Tsukamoto K, Nishimura T (2011) Estimation of cardiac event risk by gated myocardial perfusion imaging and quantitative scoring methods based on a multicenter J-ACCESS database. Circ J 75:2417–2423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nakajima K, Nishimura T (2012) Cardiovascular events in Japan. Lessons from the J-ACCESS multicenter prognostic study using myocardial perfusion imaging. Circ J 76:1313–1321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nakata T, Hashimoto A, Matsuki T, Yoshinaga K, Tsukamoto K, Tamaki N (2013) Prognostic value of automated SPECT scoring system for coronary artery disease in stress myocardial perfusion and fatty acid metabolism imaging. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 29:253–262PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zellweger MJ, Hachamovitch R, Kang X et al (2009) Threshold, incidence, and predictors of prognostically high-risk silent ischemia in asymptomatic patients without prior diagnosis of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 16:193–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Min JK, Dunning A, Lin FY et al (2011) 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 58:849–860PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Motoyama S, Sarai M, Harigaya H et al (2009) Computed tomographic angiography characteristics of atherosclerotic plaques subsequently resulting in acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol 54:49–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rispler S, Keidar Z, Ghersin E et al (2007) Integrated single-photon emission computed tomography and computed tomography coronary angiography for the assessment of hemodynamically significant coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol 49:1059–1067PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matsuo S, Nakajima K, Akhter N et al (2009) Clinical usefulness of novel cardiac MDCT/SPECT fusion image. Ann Nucl Med 23:579–586PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guibas L, Stolfi J (1985) Primitives for the manipulation of general subdivisions and the computations of Voronoi diagrams. ACM Trans Graph 4:74–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Debarba HG, Zanchet DJ, Fracaro D, Maciel A, Kalil AN (2010) Efficient liver surgery planning in 3-D based on functional segment classification and volumetric information. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2010:4797–4800PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hendel RC, Berman DS, Di Carli MF et al (2009) ACCF/ASNC/ACR/AHA/ASE/SCCT/SCMR/SNM 2009 appropriate use criteria for cardiac radionuclide imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and the Society of Nuclear Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol 53:2201–2229PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nakata T, Watanabe S, Matsuo H et al (2008) Risk management of guidelines for the routine clinical use of stress myocardial perfusion imaging. Japanese Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Tokyo, Available via http://www.jsnc.org/files/pdf/jnc-stress-guidelines.pdf. Accessed 28 May 2008Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL et al (1975) A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 51:5–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V et al (2002) 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. J Nucl Cardiol 9:240–245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Seiler C, Kirkeeide RL, Gould KL (1993) Measurement from arteriograms of regional myocardial bed size distal to any point in the coronary vascular tree for assessing anatomic area at risk. J Am Coll Cardiol 21:783–797PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Le H, Wong JT, Molloi S (2008) Estimation of regional myocardial mass at risk based on distal arterial lumen volume and length using 3D micro-CT images. Comput Med Imaging Graph 32:488–501PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kurata A, Mochizuki T, Koyama Y et al (2005) Myocardial perfusion imaging using adenosine triphosphate stress multi-slice spiral computed tomography: alternative to stress myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Circ J 69:550–557PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM et al (2009) 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 2:174–182PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rossi A, Dharampal A, Wragg A et al (2014) 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 15:85–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Links JM, Becker LC, Rigo P et al (2000) Combined corrections for attenuation, depth-dependent blur, and motion in cardiac SPECT: a multicenter trial. J Nucl Cardiol 7:414–425PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Daou D, Pointurier I, Coaguila C et al (2003) Performance of OSEM and depth-dependent resolution recovery algorithms for the evaluation of global left ventricular function in 201Tl gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med 44:155–162PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Akira Kurata
    • 1
    Email author
  • Atsushi Kono
    • 1
  • Tsuyoshi Sakamoto
    • 3
  • Teruhito Kido
    • 4
  • Teruhito Mochizuki
    • 4
  • Hiroshi Higashino
    • 5
  • Mitsunori Abe
    • 6
  • Adriaan Coenen
    • 1
  • Raluca G. Saru-Chelu
    • 1
  • Pim J. de Feyter
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gabriel P. Krestin
    • 1
  • Koen Nieman
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyErasmus University Medical CenterRotterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of CardiologyErasmus University Medical CenterRotterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Development DivisionAZE incTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Department of RadiologyEhime University Graduate School of MedicineEhimeJapan
  5. 5.Department of RadiologyYotsuba Circulation ClinicEhimeJapan
  6. 6.Department of CardiologyYotsuba Circulation ClinicEhimeJapan

Personalised recommendations