Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cardiac CT Imaging of Plaque Vulnerability: Hype or Hope?

  • Cardiac PET, CT, and MRI (SE Petersen and F Pugliese, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Cardiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Advances in cardiovascular computed tomography (CT) have resulted in an excellent ability to exclude coronary heart disease (CHD). Anatomical information, functional information, and spectral information can already be obtained with current CT technologies. Moreover, novel developments such as targeted nanoparticle contrast agents, photon-counting CT, and phase contrast CT will further enhance the diagnostic value of cardiovascular CT. This review provides an overview of current state of the art and future cardiovascular CT imaging.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

  1. Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics—2015 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2015;131:e29–322.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Murabito JM, Evans JC, Larson MG, Levy D. Prognosis after the onset of coronary heart disease. An investigation of differences in outcome between the sexes according to initial coronary disease presentation. Circulation. 1993;88:2548–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Falk E, Shah PK, Fuster V. Coronary plaque disruption. Circulation. 1995;92:657–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Braunwald E. Noninvasive detection of vulnerable coronary plaques: locking the barn door before the horse is stolen. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:58–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Arbab-Zadeh A, Fuster V. The myth of the “vulnerable plaque”: transitioning from a focus on individual lesions to atherosclerotic disease burden for coronary artery disease risk assessment. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:846–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Stone GW, Maehara A, Lansky AJ, et al. A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:226–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Virmani R, Burke AP, Farb A, Kolodgie FD. Pathology of the vulnerable plaque. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:C13–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Virmani R, Kolodgie FD, Burke AP, Farb A, Schwartz SM. Lessons from sudden coronary death: a comprehensive morphological classification scheme for atherosclerotic lesions. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2000;20:1262–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hoffmann U, Ferencik M, Cury RC, Pena AJ. Coronary CT angiography. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:797–806.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Maurovich-Horvat P, Ferencik M, Voros S, Merkely B, Hoffmann U. Comprehensive plaque assessment by coronary CT angiography. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2014;11:390–402.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van der Giessen AG, Toepker MH, Donelly PM, et al. Reproducibility, accuracy, and predictors of accuracy for the detection of coronary atherosclerotic plaque composition by computed tomography: an ex vivo comparison to intravascular ultrasound. Invest Radiol. 2010;45:693–701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Narula J, Garg P, Achenbach S, Motoyama S, Virmani R, Strauss HW. Arithmetic of vulnerable plaques for noninvasive imaging. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2008;5 Suppl 2:S2–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Leipsic J, Abbara S, Achenbach S, et al. SCCT guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of coronary CT angiography: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8:342–58. Current guidelines for interpretation and reporting of CCTA.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Achenbach S, Moselewski F, Ropers D, et al. Detection of calcified and noncalcified coronary atherosclerotic plaque by contrast-enhanced, submillimeter multidetector spiral computed tomography: a segment-based comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Circulation. 2004;109:14–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Leber AW, Becker A, Knez A, et al. Accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography to classify and quantify plaque volumes in the proximal coronary system: a comparative study using intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:672–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Motoyama S, Kondo T, Sarai M, et al. Multislice computed tomographic characteristics of coronary lesions in acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:319–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Voros S, Rinehart S, Qian Z, et al. Prospective validation of standardized, 3-dimensional, quantitative coronary computed tomographic plaque measurements using radiofrequency backscatter intravascular ultrasound as reference standard in intermediate coronary arterial lesions: results from the ATLANTA (assessment of tissue characteristics, lesion morphology, and hemodynamics by angiography with fractional flow reserve, intravascular ultrasound and virtual histology, and noninvasive computed tomography in atherosclerotic plaques) I study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:198–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marwan M, Taher MA, El Meniawy K, et al. In vivo CT detection of lipid-rich coronary artery atherosclerotic plaques using quantitative histogram analysis: a head to head comparison with IVUS. Atherosclerosis. 2011;215:110–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schlett CL, Maurovich-Horvat P, Ferencik M, et al. Histogram analysis of lipid-core plaques in coronary computed tomographic angiography: ex vivo validation against histology. Invest Radiol. 2013;48:646–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Achenbach S, Boehmer K, Pflederer T, et al. Influence of slice thickness and reconstruction kernel on the computed tomographic attenuation of coronary atherosclerotic plaque. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2010;4:110–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cademartiri F, Mollet NR, Runza G, et al. Influence of intracoronary attenuation on coronary plaque measurements using multislice computed tomography: observations in an ex vivo model of coronary computed tomography angiography. Eur Radiol. 2005;15:1426–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Maurovich-Horvat P, Hoffmann U, Vorpahl M, Nakano M, Virmani R, Alkadhi H. The napkin-ring sign: CT signature of high risk coronary plaques? J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2010;3:440–05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ito T, Terashima M, Kaneda H, et al. Comparison of in vivo assessment of vulnerable plaque by 64-slice multislice computed tomography versus optical coherence tomography. Am J Cardiol. 2011;107:1270–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kashiwagi M, Tanaka A, Kitabata H, et al. Feasibility of noninvasive assessment of thin-cap fibroatheroma by multidetector computed tomography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:1412–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Puchner SB, Liu T, Mayrhofer T, et al. High-risk plaque detected on coronary CT angiography predicts acute coronary syndromes independent of significant stenosis in acute chest pain: results from the ROMICAT-II trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:684–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Maurovich-Horvat P, Schlett CL, Alkadhi H, et al. The napkin-ring sign indicates advanced atherosclerotic lesions in coronary CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:1243–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Seifarth H, Schlett CL, Nakano M, et al. Histopathological correlates of the napkin-ring sign plaque in coronary CT angiography. Atherosclerosis. 2012;224:90–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Otsuka K, Fukuda S, Tanaka A, et al. Prognosis of vulnerable plaque on computed tomographic coronary angiography with normal myocardial perfusion image. Euro Heart J Cardiol Img. 2014;15:332–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Glagov S, Weisenberg E, Zarins CK, Stankunavicius R, Kolettis GJ. Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med. 1987;316:1371–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Varnava AM, Mills PG, Davies MJ. Relationship between coronary artery remodeling and plaque vulnerability. Circulation. 2002;105:939–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Hoffmann U, et al. Assessment of coronary remodeling in stenotic and nonstenotic coronary atherosclerotic lesions by multidetector spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:842–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gauss S, Achenbach S, Pflederer T, Schuhback A, Daniel WG, Marwan M. Assessment of coronary artery remodelling by dual-source CT: a head-to-head comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Heart. 2011;97:991–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mintz GS, Nissen SE, Anderson WD, et al. American College of Cardiology clinical expert consensus document on standards for acquisition, measurement and reporting of intravascular ultrasound studies (IVUS). A report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:1478–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Saremi F, Achenbach S. Coronary plaque characterization using CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:W249–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Narula J, Nakano M, Virmani R, et al. Histopathologic characteristics of atherosclerotic coronary disease and implications of the findings for the invasive and noninvasive detection of vulnerable plaques. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1041–51. This postmortem study defined histomorphologic characteristics of vulnerable plaques for development of imaging strategies for vulnerable plaque identification in patients at a high cardiovascular risk.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Motoyama S, Sarai M, Harigaya H, et al. Computed tomographic angiography characteristics of atherosclerotic plaques subsequently resulting in acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:49–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Motoyama S, Ito H, Sarai M, et al. Plaque characterization by coronary computed tomography angiography and the likelihood of acute coronary events in mid-term follow-up. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:337–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ferencik M, Liu T, Mayrhofer T, et al. hs-Troponin I followed by CT angiography improves acute coronary syndrome risk stratification accuracy and work-up in acute chest pain patients: results from ROMICAT II trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8(11):1272–81. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.06.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Nicholls SJ, Hsu A, Wolski K, et al. Intravascular ultrasound-derived measures of coronary atherosclerotic plaque burden and clinical outcome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2399–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Mancini GB, Hartigan PM, Shaw LJ, et al. Predicting outcome in the COURAGE trial (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation): coronary anatomy versus ischemia. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:195–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Maddox TM, Stanislawski MA, Grunwald GK, et al. Nonobstructive coronary artery disease and risk of myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2014;312:1754–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Mushtaq S, De Araujo GP, Garcia-Garcia HM, et al. Long-term prognostic effect of coronary atherosclerotic burden: validation of the computed tomography-Leaman score. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8, e002332.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. 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;50:1161–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bittencourt MS, Hulten E, Ghoshhajra B, et al. Prognostic value of nonobstructive and obstructive coronary artery disease detected by coronary computed tomography angiography to identify cardiovascular events. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:282–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. de Araujo GP, Garcia-Garcia HM, Dores H, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography-adapted Leaman score as a tool to noninvasively quantify total coronary atherosclerotic burden. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;29:1575–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Versteylen MO, Kietselaer BL, Dagnelie PC, et al. Additive value of semiautomated quantification of coronary artery disease using cardiac computed tomographic angiography to predict future acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:2296–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Vanhoenacker PK, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Van Heste R, et al. Diagnostic performance of multidetector CT angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease: meta-analysis. Radiology. 2007;244:419–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2324–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Rossi A, Papadopoulou SL, Pugliese F, et al. Quantitative computed tomographic coronary angiography: does it predict functionally significant coronary stenoses? Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:43–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Peels K, et al. Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:1703–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. De Bruyne B, Sarma J. Fractional flow reserve: a review: invasive imaging. Heart. 2008;94:949–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Taylor CA, Fonte TA, Min JK. Computational fluid dynamics applied to cardiac computed tomography for noninvasive quantification of fractional flow reserve: scientific basis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:2233–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Renker M, Schoepf UJ, Wang R, et al. Comparison of diagnostic value of a novel noninvasive coronary computed tomography angiography method versus standard coronary angiography for assessing fractional flow reserve. Am J Cardiol. 2014;114:1303–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Norgaard BL, Leipsic J, Gaur S, et al. Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in suspected coronary artery disease: the NXT trial (Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using CT Angiography: Next Steps). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1145–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Min JK, Leipsic J, Pencina MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. JAMA. 2012;308:1237–45. This study shows the potential of fractional flow reserve simulation based on coronary CT angiography.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. 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 

  57. Coenen A, Lubbers MM, Kurata A, et al. Fractional flow reserve computed from noninvasive CT angiography data: diagnostic performance of an on-site clinician-operated computational fluid dynamics algorithm. Radiology. 2015;274:674–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Douglas PS, Pontone G, Hlatky MA, et al. Clinical outcomes of fractional flow reserve by computed tomographic angiography-guided diagnostic strategies vs. usual care in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the prospective longitudinal trial of FFRCT: outcome and resource impacts study. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(47):3359–67. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv444.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Alvarez RE, Macovski A. Energy-selective reconstructions in X-ray computerized tomography. Phys Med Biol. 1976;21:733–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Machida H, Tanaka I, Fukui R, et al. Current and novel imaging techniques in coronary CT. Radiographics. 2015;35:991–1010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Kulkarni NM, Eisner BH, Pinho DF, Joshi MC, Kambadakone AR, Sahani DV. Determination of renal stone composition in phantom and patients using single-source dual-energy computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2013;37:37–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Wang R, Yu W, Wang Y, et al. Incremental value of dual-energy CT to coronary CT angiography for the detection of significant coronary stenosis: comparison with quantitative coronary angiography and single photon emission computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;27:647–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. 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 AmJRoentgenol. 2012;198:512–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Danad I, Fayad ZA, Willemink MJ, Min JK. New applications of cardiac computed tomography: dual-energy, spectral, and molecular CT imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8:710–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. 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 

  66. Scheske JA, O’Brien JM, Earls JP, et al. Coronary artery imaging with single-source rapid kilovolt peak-switching dual-energy CT. Radiology. 2013;268:702–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  68. Yamada M, Jinzaki M, Kuribayashi S, Imanishi N, Funato K, Aiso S. Beam-hardening correction for virtual monochromatic imaging of myocardial perfusion via fast-switching dual-kVp 64-slice computed tomography: a pilot study using a human heart specimen. CircJ. 2012;76:1799–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Stehli J, Fuchs TA, Singer A, et al. First experience with single-source, dual-energy CCTA for monochromatic stent imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16:507–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Secchi F, De Cecco CN, Spearman JV, et al. Monoenergetic extrapolation of cardiac dual energy CT for artifact reduction. Acta Radiol. 2015;56:413–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. 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 

  72. Boll DT, Merkle EM, Paulson EK, Mirza RA, Fleiter TR. Calcified vascular plaque specimens: assessment with cardiac dual-energy multidetector CT in anthropomorphically moving heart phantom. Radiology. 2008;249:119–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Boll DT, Merkle EM, Paulson EK, Fleiter TR. Coronary stent patency: dual-energy multidetector CT assessment in a pilot study with anthropomorphic phantom. Radiology. 2008;247:687–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Zhang LJ, Wang ZJ, Lu L, Chen B, Lu GM. Feasibility of gadolinium-enhanced dual energy CT pulmonary angiography: a pilot study in rabbits. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;27:1069–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Raju R, Thompson AG, Lee K, et al. Reduced iodine load with CT coronary angiography using dual-energy imaging: a prospective randomized trial compared with standard coronary CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8:282–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Carrascosa P, Capunay C, Rodriguez-Granillo GA, Deviggiano A, Vallejos J, Leipsic JA. Substantial iodine volume load reduction in CT angiography with dual-energy imaging: insights from a pilot randomized study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;30:1613–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Yamada Y, Jinzaki M, Okamura T, et al. Feasibility of coronary artery calcium scoring on virtual unenhanced images derived from single-source fast kVp-switching dual-energy coronary CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8:391–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Schwarz F, Nance Jr JW, Ruzsics B, Bastarrika G, Sterzik A, Schoepf UJ. Quantification of coronary artery calcium on the basis of dual-energy coronary CT angiography. Radiology. 2012;264:700–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Numburi UD, Schoenhagen P, Flamm SD, et al. Feasibility of dual-energy CT in the arterial phase: imaging after endovascular aortic repair. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:486–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Mahoney R, Pavitt CW, Gordon D, et al. Clinical validation of dual-source dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) for coronary and valve imaging in patients undergoing trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Clin Radiol. 2014;69:786–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Kaufmann S, Sauter A, Spira D, et al. Tin-filter enhanced dual-energy-CT: image quality and accuracy of CT numbers in virtual noncontrast imaging. Acad Radiol. 2013;20:596–603.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Fuchs TA, Stehli J, Dougoud S, et al. Coronary artery calcium quantification from contrast enhanced CT using gemstone spectral imaging and material decomposition. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;30:1399–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Yamak D, Panse P, Pavlicek W, Boltz T, Akay M. Non-calcified coronary atherosclerotic plaque characterization by dual energy computed tomography. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2014;18:939–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Thaiss WM, Sauter AW, Bongers M, Horger M, Nikolaou K. Clinical applications for dual energy CT versus dynamic contrast enhanced CT in oncology. Eur JRadiol. 2015;84(12):2368–79. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.06.001.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Johnson TR, Krauss B, Sedlmair M, et al. Material differentiation by dual energy CT: initial experience. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:1510–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Coursey CA, Nelson RC, Boll DT, et al. Dual-energy multidetector CT: how does it work, what can it tell us, and when can we use it in abdominopelvic imaging? Radiographics. 2010;30:1037–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. So A, Hsieh J, Imai Y, et al. Prospectively ECG-triggered rapid kV-switching dual-energy CT for quantitative imaging of myocardial perfusion. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:829–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Kaza RK, Platt JF, Cohan RH, Caoili EM, Al-Hawary MM, Wasnik A. Dual-energy CT with single- and dual-source scanners: current applications in evaluating the genitourinary tract. Radiographics. 2012;32:353–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Roessl E, Proksa R. K-edge imaging in X-ray computed tomography using multi-bin photon counting detectors. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52:4679–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Taguchi K, Iwanczyk JS. Vision 2020: Single photon counting X-ray detectors in medical imaging. Med Phys. 2013;40:100901.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  91. Shikhaliev PM, Fritz SG. Photon counting spectral CT versus conventional CT: comparative evaluation for breast imaging application. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56:1905–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Schlomka JP, Roessl E, Dorscheid R, et al. Experimental feasibility of multi-energy photon-counting K-edge imaging in pre-clinical computed tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:4031–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Ronaldson JP, Zainon R, Scott NJ, et al. Toward quantifying the composition of soft tissues by spectral CT with Medipix3. Med Phys. 2012;39:6847–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Iwanczyk JS, Nygard E, Meirav O, et al. Photon counting energy dispersive detector arrays for X-ray imaging. IEEE TransNuclSci. 2009;56:535–42.

    Google Scholar 

  95. He P, Yu H, Thayer P, et al. Preliminary experimental results from a MARS micro-CT system. J Xray Sci Technol. 2012;20:199–211.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Feuerlein S, Roessl E, Proksa R, et al. Multienergy photon-counting K-edge imaging: potential for improved luminal depiction in vascular imaging. Radiology. 2008;249:1010–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Boussel L, Coulon P, Thran A, et al. Photon counting spectral CT component analysis of coronary artery atherosclerotic plaque samples. Br J Radiol. 2014;87:20130798.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. Pfeiffer F, Weitkamp T, Bunk O, David C. Phase retrieval and differential phase-contrast imaging with low-brilliance X-ray sources. Nat Phys. 2006;2:258–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Pfeiffer F, Bech M, Bunk O, et al. Hard-X-ray dark-field imaging using a grating interferometer. Nat Mater. 2008;7:134–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Hetterich H, Willner M, Fill S, et al. Phase-contrast CT: qualitative and quantitative evaluation of atherosclerotic carotid artery plaque. Radiology. 2014;271:870–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Cong W, Xi Y, Wang G. Spherical grating based X-ray Talbot interferometry. Med Phys. 2015;42:6514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Salome M, Peyrin F, Cloetens P, et al. A synchrotron radiation microtomography system for the analysis of trabecular bone samples. Med Phys. 1999;26:2194–204.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Nugent KA, Gureyev TE, Cookson DJ, Paganin D, Barnea Z. Quantitative phase imaging using hard X rays. Phys Rev Lett. 1996;77:2961–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Momose A, Takeda T, Itai Y, Hirano K. Phase-contrast X-ray computed tomography for observing biological soft tissues. Nat Med. 1996;2:473–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Diemoz PC, Coan P, Glaser C, Bravin A. Absorption, refraction and scattering in analyzer-based imaging: comparison of different algorithms. Opt Express. 2010;18:3494–509.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Davis TJ, Gureyev TE, Gao D, Stevenson AW, Wilkins SW. X-ray image contrast from a simple phase object. Phys Rev Lett. 1995;74:3173–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Coan P, Wagner A, Bravin A, Diemoz PC, Keyrilainen J, Mollenhauer J. In vivo X-ray phase contrast analyzer-based imaging for longitudinal osteoarthritis studies in guinea pigs. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:7649–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Beckmann F, Bonse U, Busch F, Gunnewig O. X-ray microtomography (microCT) using phase contrast for the investigation of organic matter. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1997;21:539–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Weitkamp T, David C, Bunk O, Bruder J, Cloetens P, Pfeiffer F. X-ray phase radiography and tomography of soft tissue using grating interferometry. Eur J Radiol. 2008;68:S13–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Schulz G, Weitkamp T, Zanette I, et al. High-resolution tomographic imaging of a human cerebellum: comparison of absorption and grating-based phase contrast. J R Soc Interface. 2010;7:1665–76.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Pfeiffer F, Bunk O, David C, et al. High-resolution brain tumor visualization using three-dimensional X-ray phase contrast tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52:6923–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Li K, Ge YS, Garrett J, Bevins N, Zambelli J, Chen GH. Grating-based phase contrast tomosynthesis imaging: proof-of-concept experimental studies. Med Phys. 2014;41.

  113. Donath T, Pfeiffer F, Bunk O, et al. Toward clinical X-ray phase-contrast CT: demonstration of enhanced soft-tissue contrast in human specimen. Invest Radiol. 2010;45:445–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Winklhofer S, Peter S, Tischler V, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative and qualitative phase-contrast imaging for the ex vivo characterization of human coronary atherosclerotic plaques. Radiology. 2015;277:64–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. De La Vega JC, Hafeli UO. Utilization of nanoparticles as X-ray contrast agents for diagnostic imaging applications. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2015;10:81–95.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Liu Y, Ai K, Lu L. Nanoparticulate X-ray computed tomography contrast agents: from design validation to in vivo applications. Acc Chem Res. 2012;45:1817–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Christiansen C. X-ray contrast media—an overview. Toxicology. 2005;209:185–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Park K, Lee S, Kang E, Kim K, Choi K, Kwon IC. New generation of multifunctional nanoparticle for cancer imaging and therapy. Adv Funct Mater. 2009;1553–1566.

  119. Qin J, Peng C, Zhao B, et al. Noninvasive detection of macrophages in atherosclerotic lesions by computed tomography enhanced with PEGylated gold nanoparticles. Int J Nanomedicine. 2014;9:5575–90.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  120. Basu S, Mukherjee B, Chowdhury SR, et al. Colloidal gold-loaded, biodegradable, polymer-based stavudine nanoparticle uptake by macrophages: an in vitro study. Int J Nanomedicine. 2012;7:6049–61.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  121. Koenig W, Khuseyinova N. Biomarkers of atherosclerotic plaque instability and rupture. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2007;27:15–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Lusis AJ. Atherosclerosis. Nature. 2000;407:233–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  123. Cormode DP, Skajaa T, van Schooneveld MM, et al. Nanocrystal core high-density lipoproteins: a multimodality contrast agent platform. Nano Lett. 2008;8:3715–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  124. Cormode DP, Roessl E, Thran A, et al. Atherosclerotic plaque composition: analysis with multicolor CT and targeted gold nanoparticles. Radiology. 2010;256:774–82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  125. 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. Circulation. 2010;122:e525–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Willemink MJ, den Harder AM, Foppen W, et al. Finding the optimal dose reduction and iterative reconstruction level for coronary calcium scoring. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2015;10(1):69–75. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2015.08.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Willemink MJ, de Jong PA, Leiner T, et al. Iterative reconstruction techniques for computed tomography Part 1: technical principles. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:1623–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Martin J. Willemink & Tim Leiner

  2. MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary

    Pál Maurovich-Horvat

Authors
  1. Martin J. Willemink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tim Leiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pál Maurovich-Horvat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pál Maurovich-Horvat.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Martin J. Willemink, Tim Leiner, and Pál Maurovich-Horvat declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Cardiac PET, CT, and MRI

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Willemink, M.J., Leiner, T. & Maurovich-Horvat, P. Cardiac CT Imaging of Plaque Vulnerability: Hype or Hope?. Curr Cardiol Rep 18, 37 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-016-0714-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-016-0714-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation