Frontiers of Medicine

, 5:254

Multislice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease: 3D visualizations



Multislice computed tomography (CT) has been widely used in clinical practice for the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease due to its reduced invasiveness and high spatial and temporal resolution. As a reliable alternative to conventional angiography, multislice CT angiography has been recognized as the method of choice for detecting and diagnosing head and neck vascular disease, abdominal aortic aneurysm, aortic dissection, and pulmonary embolism. In patients with suspected coronary artery disease, although invasive coronary angiography still remains as the gold standard technique, multislice CT angiography demonstrates high diagnostic accuracy; in selected patients, it is considered as the first-line technique. The imaging diagnosis of cardiovascular disease is based on a combination of two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) visualization tools to enhance the diagnostic value. This is facilitated by reconstructed visualizations which provide additional information about the extent of the disease, an accurate assessment of the spatial relationship between normal structures and pathological changes, and pre-operative planning and post-procedure follow-up. The aim of the present article is to present an overview of the diagnostic performance of various 2D and 3D CT visualizations in cardiovascular disease, including multiplanar reformation, maximum intensity projection, volume rendering, and virtual intravascular endoscopy. The recognition of the potential value of these visualizations will assist clinicians in efficiently using the multislice CT imaging modality for the diagnostic management of patients with cardiovascular disease.


cardiovascular disease multislice computed tomography three-dimensional reconstruction diagnosis visualization 


  1. 1.
    Lloyd-Jones D, Adams RJ, Brown TM, Carnethon M, Dai S, De Simone G, Ferguson TB, Ford E, Furie K, Gillespie C, Go A, Greenlund K, Haase N, Hailpern S, Ho PM, Howard V, Kissela B, Kittner S, Lackland D, Lisabeth L, Marelli A, McDermott MM, Meigs J, Mozaffarian D, Mussolino M, Nichol G, Roger VL, Rosamond W, Sacco R, Sorlie P, Stafford R, Thom T, Wasserthiel-Smoller S, Wong ND, Wylie-Rosett J, American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Executive summary: heart disease and stroke statistics—2010 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2010;121(7):948–954PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gaziano TA, Bitton A, Anand S, Abrahams-Gessel S, Murphy A. Growing epidemic of coronary heart disease in low- and middleincome countries. Curr Probl Cardiol 2010;35(2):72–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu L. Cardiovascular diseases in China. Biochem Cell Biol 2007;85(2):157–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boerma T, Shibuya K. World Health Statistics. 2007. on 22 July 2011)
  5. 5.
    Adams MR, Celermajer DS. Detection of presymptomatic atherosclerosis: a current perspective. Clin Sci (Lond) 1999; 97(5): 615–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dormandy J, Heeck L, Vig S. The natural history of claudication: risk to life and limb. Semin Vasc Surg 1999;12(2):123–137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goyen M, Herborn CU, Kröger K, Lauenstein TC, Debatin JF, Ruehm SG. Detection of atherosclerosis: systemic imaging for systemic disease with whole-body three-dimensional MR angiography—initial experience. Radiology 2003;227(1):277–282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Noto TJ Jr, Johnson LW, Krone R, Weaver WF, Clark DA, Kramer JR Jr, Vetrovec GW. Cardiac catheterization 1990: a report of the Registry of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCA&I). Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1991;24(2):75–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sun Z, Ng KH, Brennan P. Medical imaging of the heart and cardiovascular system. In: Acharya UR, Molinari F, Tamura T, Naidu DS, Suri JS. Distribution diagnosis and home healthcare (D2H2, Vol. 3). Stevenson Ranch, California: American Scientific Publishers, 2011 (in press)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McCollough CH, Zink FE. Performance evaluation of a multi-slice CT system. Med Phys 1999;26(11):2223–2230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nieman K, Oudkerk M, Rensing BJ, van Ooijen P, Munne A, van Geuns RJ, de Feyter PJ. Coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography. Lancet 2001;357(9256):599–603PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sun Z, Cao Y, Li H. Multislice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. J Geriatric Cardiol 2011;8(2):1–10Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sun Z, Choo GH, Ng KH. Coronary CT angiography: current status and continuing challenges. Br J Radiol 2011 Mar 8. [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H, Petersilka M, Gruber K, Süss C, Grasruck M, Stierstorfer K, Krauss B, Raupach R, Primak AN, Küttner A, Achenbach S, Becker C, Kopp A, Ohnesorge BM. First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 2006;16(2):256–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rybicki FJ, Otero HJ, Steigner ML, Vorobiof G, Nallamshetty L, Mitsouras D, Ersoy H, Mather RT, Judy PF, Cai T, Coyner K, Schultz K, Whitmore AG, Di Carli MF. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;24(5):535–546PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hollingworth W, Nathens AB, Kanne JP, Crandall ML, Crummy TA, Hallam DK, Wang MC, Jarvik JG. The diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography angiography for traumatic or atherosclerotic lesions of the carotid and vertebral arteries: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 2003;48(1):88–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Josephson SA, Bryant SO, Mak HK, Johnston SC, Dillon WP, Smith WS. Evaluation of carotid stenosis using CT angiography in the initial evaluation of stroke and TIA. Neurology 2004;63(3):457–460PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sun Z. Helical CT angiography of abdominal aortic aneurysms treated with suprarenal stent grafting. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2003;26(3):290–295PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rydberg J, Kopecky KK, Lalka SG, Johnson MS, Dalsing MC, Persohn SA. Stent grafting of abdominal aortic aneurysms: pre- and postoperative evaluation with multislice helical CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2001;25(4):580–586PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sun Z, Mwipatayi BP, Allen YB, Hartley DE, Lawrence-Brown MMD. Multislice CT angiography of fenestrated endovascular stent grafting for treating abdominal aortic aneurysms: a pictorial review of the 2D/3D visualizations. Korean J Radiol 2009; 10(3): 285–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sun Z, Cao Y. Multislice CT virtual intravascular endoscopy of aortic dissection: a pictorial essay. World J Radiol 2010; 2(11): 440–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Castañer E, Andreu M, Gallardo X, Mata JM, Cabezuelo MA, Pallardó Y. CT in nontraumatic acute thoracic aortic disease: typical and atypical features and complications. Radiographics 2003;23:S93–S110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sebastià C, Pallisa E, Quiroga S, Alvarez-Castells A, Dominguez R, Evangelista A. Aortic dissection: diagnosis and follow-up with helical CT. Radiographics 1999;19(1):45–60, quiz 149–150PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schoepf UJ, Goldhaber SZ, Costello P. Spiral computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism. Circulation 2004;109(18):2160–2167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Perrier A, Roy PM, Sanchez O, Le Gal G, Meyer G, Gourdier AL, Furber A, Revel MP, Howarth N, Davido A, Bounameaux H. Multidetector-row computed tomography in suspected pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2005;352(17):1760–1768PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sun Z, Dosari SA, Ng C, al-Muntashari A, Almaliky S. Multislice CT virtual intravascular endoscopy for assessing pulmonary embolisms: a pictorial review. Korean J Radiol 2010; 11(2): 222–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sun Z, Jiang W. Diagnostic value of multislice CT angiography in coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2006;60:279–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sun Z, Lin CH, Davidson R, Dong C, Liao Y. Diagnostic value of 64-slice CT angiography in coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 2008;67(1):78–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sun Z, Ng KH. Multislice CT angiography in cardiac imaging. Part II: clinical applications in coronary artery disease. Singapore Med J 2010;51(4):282–289PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kalender WA, Seissler W, Klotz E, Vock P. Spiral volumetric CT with single-breath-hold technique, continuous transport, and continuous scanner rotation. Radiology 1990;176(1):181–183PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kohl G. The evolution and state-of-the-art principles of multislice computed tomography. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2005;2(6):470–476, 499–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Leber A W, Johnson T, Becker A, von Ziegler F, Tittus J, Nikolaou K, Reiser M, Steinbeck G, Becker CR, Knez A. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source multi-slice CT-coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2007;28(19):2354–2360PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brodoefel H, Burgstahler C, Tsiflikas I, Reimann A, Schroeder S, Claussen CD, Heuschmid M, Kopp AF. Dual-source CT: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability, and calcification on image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Radiology 2008;247(2):346–355PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, Busch S, Leber AW, Becker A, Wintersperger BJ, Rist C, Knez A, Reiser MF, Becker CR. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Invest Radiol 2007;42(10):684–691PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schwarz F, Ruzsics B, Schoepf UJ, Bastarrika G, Chiaramida SA, Abro JA, Brothers RL, Vogt S, Schmidt B, Costello P, Zwerner PL. Dual-energy CT of the heart—principles and protocols. Eur J Radiol 2008;68(3):423–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Korn A, Bender B, Thomas C, Danz S, Fenchel M, Nägele T, Heuschmid M, Ernemann U, Hauser TK. Dual energy CTA of the carotid bifurcation: advantage of plaque subtraction for assessment of grade of the stenosis and morphology. Eur J Radiol 2010 Sep 10. [Epub ahead of print] DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.08.028Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thomas C, Korn A, Krauss B, Ketelsen D, Tsiflikas I, Reimann A, Brodoefel H, Claussen CD, Kopp AF, Ernemann U, Heuschmid M. Automatic bone and plaque removal using dual energy CT for head and neck angiography: feasibility and initial performance evaluation. Eur J Radiol 2010;76(1):61–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 1991;325(7):445–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    European Carotid Surgery Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Randomised trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST). Lancet 1998;351(9113):1379–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study. Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. JAMA 1995;273(18):1421–1428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Al Shuhaimi A, Ababtain K, Sun Z. Diagnostic value of noninvasive imaging techniques in the detection of carotid artery stenosis: a systematic review. Radiographer 2009;56:14–18Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chen CJ, Lee TH, Hsu HL, Tseng YC, Lin SK, Wang LJ, Wong YC. Multi-slice CT angiography in diagnosing total versus near occlusions of the internal carotid artery: comparison with catheter angiography. Stroke 2004;35(1):83–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Agid R, Lee SK, Willinsky RA, Farb RI, ter Brugge KG. Acute subarachnoid hemorrhage: using 64-slice multidetector CT angiography to “triage” patients’ treatment. Neuroradiology 2006;48(11):787–794PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pozzi-Mucelli F, Bruni S, Doddi M, Calgaro A, Braini M, Cova M. Detection of intracranial aneurysms with 64 channel multidetector row computed tomography: comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Eur J Radiol 2007;64(1):15–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    McKinney AM, Palmer CS, Truwit CL, Karagulle A, Teksam M. Detection of aneurysms by 64-section multidetector CT angiography in patients acutely suspected of having an intracranial aneurysm and comparison with digital subtraction and 3D rotational angiography. Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29(3):594–602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Luo Z, Wang D, Sun X, Zhang T, Liu F, Dong D, Chan NK, Shen B. Comparison of the accuracy of subtraction CT angiography performed on 320-detector row volume CT with conventional CT angiography for diagnosis of intracranial aneurysms. Eur J Radiol 2011 May 30. [Epub ahead of print] DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.05.05.003Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tomandl BF, Hammen T, Klotz E, Ditt H, Stemper B, Lell M. Bonesubtraction CT angiography for the evaluation of intracranial aneurysms. Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27(1):55–59PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sakamoto S, Kiura Y, Shibukawa M, Ohba S, Arita K, Kurisu K. Subtracted 3D CT angiography for evaluation of internal carotid artery aneurysms: comparison with conventional digital subtraction angiography. Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27(6):1332–1337PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Duan SY, Lv SM, Ye F, Lin QC. Imaging anatomy and variation of vertebral artery and bone structure at craniocervical junction. Eur Spine J 2009;18(8):1102–1108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, Arbab-Zadeh A, Niinuma H, Gottlieb I, Paul N, Clouse ME, Shapiro EP, Hoe J, Lardo AC, Bush DE, de Roos A, Cox C, Brinker J, Lima JA. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008;359 (22):2324–2336PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, Gitter M, Sutherland J, Halamert E, Scherer M, Bellinger R, Martin A, Benton R, Delago A, Min JK. 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(21):1724–1732PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Meijboom WB, Meijs MFL, Schuijf JD, Cramer MJ, Mollet NR, van Mieghem CA, Nieman K, van Werkhoven JM, Pundziute G, Weustink AC, de Vos AM, Pugliese F, Rensing B, Jukema JW, Bax JJ, Prokop M, Doevendans PA, Hunink MG, Krestin GP, de Feyter PJ. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52(25):2135–2144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sun Z, Dimpudus FJ, Nugroho J, Adipranoto JD. CT virtual intravascular endoscopy assessment of coronary artery plaques: a preliminary study. Eur J Radiol 2010;75(1):e112–e119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Habets J, Symersky P, van Herwerden LA, de Mol BAJM, Spijkerboer AM, Mali WP, Budde RPJ. Prosthetic heart valve assessment with multidetector-row CT: imaging characteristics of 91 valves in 83 patients. Eur Radiol 2011;21(7):1390–1396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Girard SE, Miller FA Jr, Orszulak TA, Mullany CJ, Montgomery S, Edwards WD, Tazelaar HD, Malouf JF, Tajik AJ. Reoperation for prosthetic aortic valve obstruction in the era of echocardiography: trends in diagnostic testing and comparison with surgical findings. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37(2):579–584PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Konen E, Goitein O, Feinberg MS, Eshet Y, Raanani E, Rimon U, Di-Segni E. The role of ECG-gated MDCT in the evaluation of aortic and mitral mechanical valves: initial experience. Am J Roentgenol 2008;191(1):26–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Parodi JC, Palmaz JC, Barone HD. Transfemoral intraluminal graft implantation for abdominal aortic aneurysms. Ann Vasc Surg 1991;5(6):491–499PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Woodburn KR, May J, White GH. Endoluminal abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. Br J Surg 1998;85(4):435–443PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Prinssen M, Verhoeven EL, Buth J, Cuypers PW, van Sambeek MR, Balm R, Buskens E, Grobbee DE, Blankensteijn JD, Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) Trial Group. A randomized trial comparing conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. N Engl J Med 2004;351(16):1607–1618PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Greenhalgh RM, Brown LC, Kwong GP, Powell JT, Thompson SG, EVAR Trial Participants. Comparison of endovascular aneurysm repair with open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1), 30-day operative mortality results: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;364(9437):843–848PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    O’Donnell ME, Sun Z, Winder RJ, Ellis PK, Lau LL, Blair PH. Suprarenal fixation of endovascular aortic stent grafts: assessment of medium-term to long-term renal function by analysis of juxtarenal stent morphology. J Vasc Surg 2007;45(4):694–700PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lau LL, Hakaim AG, Oldenburg WA, Neuhauser B, McKinney JM, Paz-Fumagalli R, Stockland A. Effect of suprarenal versus infrarenal aortic endograft fixation on renal function and renal artery patency: a comparative study with intermediate follow-up. J Vasc Surg 2003;37(6):1162–1168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Greenberg RK, Chuter TA, Lawrence-Brown M, Haulon S, Nolte L, Zenith Investigators. Analysis of renal function after aneurysm repair with a device using suprarenal fixation (Zenith AAA Endovascular Graft) in contrast to open surgical repair. J Vasc Surg 2004;39(6):1219–1228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Muhs BE, Verhoeven EL, Zeebregts CJ, Tielliu IF, Prins TR, Verhagen HJ, van den Dungen JJ. Mid-term results of endovascular aneurysm repair with branched and fenestrated endografts. J Vasc Surg 2006;44(1):9–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Rydberg J, Kopecky KK, Johnson MS, Patel NH, Persohn SA, Lalka SG. Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: assessment with multislice CT. Am J Roentgenol 2001;177(3):607–614Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Sun Z, Winder RJ, Kelly BE, Ellis PK, Kennedy PT, Hirst DG. Diagnostic value of CT virtual intravascular endoscopy in aortic stent-grafting. J Endovasc Ther 2004;11(1):13–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Sun Z, Winder RJ, Kelly BE, Ellis PK, Hirst DG. CT virtual intravascular endoscopy of abdominal aortic aneurysms treated with suprarenal endovascular stent grafting. Abdom Imaging 2003;28 (4):580–587PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Sun Z, O’Donnell ME, Winder RJ, Ellis PK, Blair PH. Effect of suprarenal fixation of aortic stent-grafts on the renal artery ostia: assessment of morphological changes by virtual intravascular endoscopy. J Endovasc Ther 2007;14(5):650–660PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Sun Z, Allen YB, Nadkarni S, Knight R, Hartley DE, Lawrence-Brown MM. CT virtual intravascular endoscopy in the visualization of fenestrated stent-grafts. J Endovasc Ther 2008;15(1):42–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Verhoeven EL, Prins TR, Tielliu IF, van den Dungen JJ, Zeebregts CJ, Hulsebos RG, van Andringa de Kempenaer MG, Oudkerk M, van Schilfgaarde R. Treatment of short-necked infrarenal aortic aneurysms with fenestrated stent-grafts: short-term results. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2004;27(5):477–483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Scaglione M, Salvolini L, Casciani E, Giovagnoni A, Mazzei MA, Volterrani L. The many faces of aortic dissections: beware of unusual presentations. Eur J Radiol 2008;65(3):359–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Berger FH, van Lienden KP, Smithuis R, Nicolaou S, van Delden OM. Acute aortic syndrome and blunt traumatic aortic injury: pictorial review of MDCT imaging. Eur J Radiol 2010;74(1):24–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Nikolaou K, Thieme S, Sommer W, Johnson T, Reiser MF. Diagnosing pulmonary embolism: new computed tomography applications. J Thorac Imaging 2010;25(2):151–160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Stein PD, Woodard PK, Weg JG, Wakefield TW, Tapson VF, Sostman HD, Sos TA, Quinn DA, Leeper KV Jr, Hull RD, Hales CA, Gottschalk A, Goodman LR, Fowler SE, Buckley JD, PIOPED II Investigators. Diagnostic pathways in acute pulmonary embolism: recommendations of the PIOPED II Investigators. Radiology 2007;242(1):15–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Schoepf UJ, Holzknecht N, Helmberger TK, Crispin A, Hong C, Becker CR, Reiser MF. Subsegmental pulmonary emboli: improved detection with thin-collimation multi-detector row spiral CT. Radiology 2002;222(2):483–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Ruzsics B, Schwarz F, Schoepf UJ, Lee YS, Bastarrika G, Chiaramida SA, Costello P, Zwerner PL. Comparison of dualenergy computed tomography of the heart with single photon emission computed tomography for assessment of coronary artery stenosis and of the myocardial blood supply. Am J Cardiol 2009;104(3):318–326PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Nagao M, Kido T, Watanabe K, Saeki H, Okayama H, Kurata A, Hosokawa K, Higashino H, Mochizuki T. Functional assessment of coronary artery flow using adenosine stress dual-energy CT: a preliminary study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011; 27(3): 471–481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Weininger M, Schoepf UJ, Ramachandra A, Fink C, Rowe GW, Costello P, Henzler T. Adenosine-stress dynamic real-time myocardial perfusion CT and adenosine-stress first-pass dual-energy myocardial perfusion CT for the assessment of acute chest pain: Initial results. Eur J Radiol 2010 Dec 29. [Epub ahead of print] DOI:10._1016/j.ejrad.2010.11.022Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Meyer M, Nance JW Jr, Schoepf UJ, Moscariello A, Weininger M, Rowe GW, Ruzsics B, Kang DK, Chiaramida SA, Schoenberg SO, Fink C, Henzler T. Cost-effectiveness of substituting dualenergy CT for SPECT in the assessment of myocardial perfusion for the workup of coronary artery disease. Eur J Radiol 2011 Jan 27. [Epub ahead of print] DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.12.055Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Discipline of Medical Imaging, Department of Imaging and Applied PhysicsCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations