Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Imaging in CABG Patients

  • Imaging (Q Truong, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of the review

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is one of the most common major surgical procedures performed. Atherosclerosis however is a progressive condition; it is probably therefore that patients with CABG will represent with ischemic symptoms. The purpose of this review is to provide familiarity with testing in CABG patients to assist clinicians in their decision-making.

Recent findings

CT angiography of coronary arteries and grafts (CCTA) has evolved into an alternative approach to diagnose graft disease or occlusion. As such, CCTA may help risk stratify patients post-CABG. CCTA thus joins the armamentarium of traditional functional tests that can be used. The consequences of which type of test is chosen are discussed.

Summary

Through discussion of the contemporary literature for imaging in CABG patients, this review will focus on the strengths and weaknesses of both anatomical and functional approaches. It appears that the impact of which index test is chosen is as important post-CABG as it is in patients with suspected CAD.

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 and Recommended Reading

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

  1. Dee R. Who assisted whom? Tex Heart Inst J. 2003;30(1):90.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Chow ALS, Small GR. SPECT perfusion or CT angiography for chest pain patients with prior CABG? Resource and cost considerations. Diagnostic Imaging Europe. 2020;36:28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ribera A, Ferreira-Gonzalez I, Cascant P, Marsal JR, Romero B, Pedrol D, et al. Survival, clinical status and quality of life five years after coronary surgery. The ARCA study. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2009;62(6):642–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ketonen M, Pajunen P, Koukkunen H, Immonen-Raiha P, Mustonen J, Mahonen M, et al. Long-term prognosis after coronary artery bypass surgery. Int J Cardiol. 2008;124(1):72–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Killen DA, Reed WA, Wathanacharoen S, Beauchamp G, McConahay DR, Arnold M. Normal survival curve after coronary artery bypass. South Med J. 1982;75(8):906–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. van Domburg RT, Kappetein AP, Bogers AJ. The clinical outcome after coronary bypass surgery: a 30-year follow-up study. Eur Heart J. 2009;30(4):453–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. McKavanagh P, Yanagawa B, Zawadowski G, Cheema A. Management and prevention of saphenous vein graft failure: a review. Cardiol Ther. 2017;6(2):203–23.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Newby DE, Adamson PD, Berry C, Boon NA, Dweck MR, Flather M, et al. Coronary CT angiography and 5-year risk of myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(10):924–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Douglas PS, Hoffmann U, Patel MR, Mark DB, Al-Khalidi HR, Cavanaugh B, et al. Outcomes of anatomical versus functional testing for coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(14):1291–300.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. • Liao L, Kong DF, Shaw LK, Sketch MH Jr, Milano CA, Lee KL, et al. A new anatomic score for prognosis after cardiac catheterization in patients with previous bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46(9):1684–92. A seminal paper that describes the anatomical derivation of risk stratification scores based on coronary and graft anatomy using ICA.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Califf RM, Phillips HR III, Hindman MC, Mark DB, Lee KL, Behar VS, et al. Prognostic value of a coronary artery jeopardy score. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985;5(5):1055–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. •• Mushtaq S, Andreini D, Pontone G, Bertella E, Bartorelli AL, Conte E, et al. Prognostic value of coronary CTA in coronary bypass patients: a long-term follow-up study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7(6):580–9. Longest follow up paper using CCTA and confirms utility of UCT as a risk marker.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Farooq V, Girasis C, Magro M, Onuma Y, Morel MA, Heo JH, et al. The CABG SYNTAX score - an angiographic tool to grade the complexity of coronary disease following coronary artery bypass graft surgery: from the SYNTAX left Main angiographic (SYNTAX-LE MANS) substudy. EuroIntervention. 2013;8(11):1277–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hamon M, Lepage O, Malagutti P, Riddell JW, Morello R, Agostini D, et al. Diagnostic performance of 16- and 64-section spiral CT for coronary artery bypass graft assessment: meta-analysis. Radiology. 2008;247(3):679–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Brundage BH, Lipton MJ, Herfkens RJ, Berninger WH, Redington RW, Chatterjee K, et al. Detection of patent coronary bypass grafts by computed tomography. A preliminary report. Circulation. 1980;61(4):826–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Moncada R, Salinas M, Churchill R, Love L, Reynes C, Demos TC, et al. Patency of saphenous aortocoronary-bypass grafts demonstrated by computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 1980;303(9):503–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Guthaner DF, Brody WR, Ricci M, Oyer PE, Wexler L. The use of computed tomography in the diagnosis of coronary artery bypass graft patency. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1980;3(1):3–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hamon M, Biondi-Zoccai GG, Malagutti P, Agostoni P, Morello R, Valgimigli M, et al. Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared with conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(9):1896–910.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Weustink AC, Nieman K, Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Meijboom WB, van MC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography angiography in patients after bypass grafting: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(7):816–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. de Graaf FR, van Velzen JE, Witkowska AJ, Schuijf JD, van der Bijl N, Kroft LJ, et al. Diagnostic performance of 320-slice multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography in patients after coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(11):2285–96.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Gramer BM, Diez Martinez P, Chin AS, Sylvestre MP, Larrivee S, Stevens LM, et al. 256-slice CT angiographic evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability and Z-axis location on image quality. PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e91861.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, Berra K, Blankenship JC, Dallas AP, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(24):e44–e164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, Mark D, Min J, O'Gara P, 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. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2010;4(6):407–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A, Capodanno D, Barbato E, Funck-Brentano C, et al. ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(3):407–77.

  25. Small GR, Yam Y, Chen L, Ahmed O, Al-Mallah M, Berman DS, et al. Prognostic assessment of coronary artery bypass patients with 64-slice computed tomography angiography: anatomical information is incremental to clinical risk prediction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(23):2389–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. •• Chow BJ, Ahmed O, Small G, Alghamdi AA, Yam Y, Chen L, et al. Prognostic value of CT angiography in coronary bypass patients. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4(5):496–502. First description of Unprotected coronary territority" (UCT) risk assessment tool in CABG patients and first CCTA prognostic paper in this population.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bassri H, Salari F, Noohi F, Motevali M, Abdi S, Givtaj N, et al. Evaluation of early coronary graft patency after coronary artery bypass graft surgery using multislice computed tomography angiography. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2009;9:53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee YW, Yang CC, Mok GS, Law WY, Su CT, Wu TH. Prospectively versus retrospectively ECG-gated 256-slice CT angiography to assess coronary artery bypass grafts--comparison of image quality and radiation dose. PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e49212.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Ferencik M, Ropers D, Abbara S, Cury RC, Hoffmann U, Nieman K, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of image postprocessing methods for the detection of coronary artery stenoses by using multidetector CT. Radiology. 2007;243(3):696–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Leipsic J, Abbara S, Achenbach S, Cury R, Earls JP, Mancini GJ, 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(5):342–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Cury RC, Abbara S, Achenbach S, Agatston A, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, et al. CAD-RADS(TM) coronary artery disease - reporting and data system. An expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the north American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2016;10(4):269–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mushtaq S, Conte E, Pontone G, Pompilio G, Guglielmo M, Annoni A, et al. Interpretability of coronary CT angiography performed with a novel whole-heart coverage high-definition CT scanner in 300 consecutive patients with coronary artery bypass grafts. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2020;14(2):137–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Trigo Bautista A, Estornell J, Ridocci F, Soriano CJ, Gudin M, Vilar JV, et al. Non-invasive assessment of coronary artery bypass grafts by computed tomography: comparison with conventional coronary angiography. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2005;58(7):807–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Langenburg SE, Buchanan SA, Blackbourne LH, Scheri RP, Sinclair KN, Martinez J, et al. Predicting survival after coronary revascularization for ischemic cardiomyopathy. Ann Thorac Surg. 1995;60(5):1193–6. discussion 1196-1197.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Alderman EL, Kip KE, Whitlow PL, Bashore T, Fortin D, Bourassa MG, et al. Native coronary disease progression exceeds failed revascularization as cause of angina after five years in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(4):766–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kieser TM, Rose S, Kowalewski R, Belenkie I. Transit-time flow predicts outcomes in coronary artery bypass graft patients: a series of 1000 consecutive arterial grafts. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2010;38(2):155–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sousa-Uva M, Neumann FJ, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;55(1):4–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sakabe D, Fukui T, Oda S, Tominaga O, Okamoto K, Kato S, et al. Noninvasive flow evaluations of coronary artery bypass grafting using dynamic cardiac CT. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(48):e23338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Chin AS, Goldman LE, Eisenberg MJ. Functional testing after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a meta-analysis. Can J Cardiol. 2003;19(7):802–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Al Aloul B, Mbai M, Adabag S, Garcia S, Thai H, Goldman S, et al. Utility of nuclear stress imaging for detecting coronary artery bypass graft disease. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2012;12:62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. • Pen A, Yam Y, Chen L, Dorbala S, Di Carli MF, Merhige ME, et al. Prognostic value of Rb-82 positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging in coronary artery bypass patients. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15(7):787–92. Multicenter study confirming utility of PET perfusion in CABG prognostication.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Takx RA, Isgum I, Willemink MJ, van der Graaf Y, de Koning HJ, Vliegenthart R, et al. Quantification of coronary artery calcium in nongated CT to predict cardiovascular events in male lung cancer screening participants: results of the NELSON study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2015;9(1):50–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rubinstein RI, Askenase AD, Thickman D, Feldman MS, Agarwal JB, Helfant RH. Magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate patency of aortocoronary bypass grafts. Circulation. 1987;76(4):786–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Klein C, Nagel E, Gebker R, Kelle S, Schnackenburg B, Graf K, et al. Magnetic resonance adenosine perfusion imaging in patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(4):437–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. • Acampa W, Petretta M, Evangelista L, Nappi G, Luongo L, Petretta MP, et al. Stress cardiac single-photon emission computed tomographic imaging late after coronary artery bypass surgery for risk stratification and estimation of time to cardiac events. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;136(1):46–51. Well done study confirming the utility of SPECT perfusion imaging in CABG patients.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Acampa W, Petretta MP, Daniele S, Perrone-Filardi P, Petretta M, Cuocolo A. Myocardial perfusion imaging after coronary revascularization: a clinical appraisal. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(8):1275–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Zellweger MJ, Lewin HC, Lai S, Dubois EA, Friedman JD, Germano G, et al. When to stress patients after coronary artery bypass surgery? Risk stratification in patients early and late post-CABG using stress myocardial perfusion SPECT: implications of appropriate clinical strategies. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37(1):144–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Beanlands RS, Nichol G, Huszti E, Humen D, Racine N, Freeman M, et al. F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging-assisted management of patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction and suspected coronary disease: a randomized, controlled trial (PARR-2). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50(20):2002–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Cortigiani L, Bigi R, Sicari R, Landi P, Bovenzi F, Picano E. Stress echocardiography for the risk stratification of patients following coronary bypass surgery. Int J Cardiol. 2010;143(3):337–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Cortigiani L, Rigo F, Bovenzi F, Sicari R, Picano E. The prognostic value of coronary flow velocity Reserve in two Coronary Arteries during Vasodilator Stress Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2019;32(1):81–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU, Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Kramer CM, et al. ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(4):380–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Fihn SD, Blankenship JC, Alexander KP, Bittl JA, Byrne JG, Fletcher BJ, et al. 2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS focused update of the guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(18):1929–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Jahnke C, Nagel E, Gebker R, Kokocinski T, Kelle S, Manka R, et al. Prognostic value of cardiac magnetic resonance stress tests: adenosine stress perfusion and dobutamine stress wall motion imaging. Circulation. 2007;115(13):1769–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Kelle S, Chiribiri A, Vierecke J, Egnell C, Hamdan A, Jahnke C, et al. Long-term prognostic value of dobutamine stress CMR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4(2):161–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. SCOT-HEART investigators. CT coronary angiography in patients with suspected angina due to coronary heart disease (SCOT-HEART): an open-label, parallel-group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9985):2383–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60291-4.

  56. Greenberg BH, Hart R, Botvinick EH, Werner JA, Brundage BH, Shames DM, et al. Thallium-201 myocardial perfusion scintigraphy to evaluate patients after coronary bypass surgery. Am J Cardiol. 1978;42(2):167–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Min JK, Gilmore A, Budoff MJ, Berman DS, O'Day K. Cost-effectiveness of coronary CT angiography versus myocardial perfusion SPECT for evaluation of patients with chest pain and no known coronary artery disease. Radiology. 2010;254(3):801–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. McKavanagh P, Lusk L, Ball PA, Verghis RM, Agus AM, Trinick TR, et al. A comparison of cardiac computerized tomography and exercise stress electrocardiogram test for the investigation of stable chest pain: the clinical results of the CAPP randomized prospective trial. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16(4):441–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Williams MC, Hunter A, Shah ASV, Assi V, Lewis S, Smith J, et al. Use of coronary computed tomographic angiography to guide Management of Patients with Coronary Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(15):1759–68.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Small GR, Erthal F, Alenazy A, Yam Y, Edwards M, Crean A, et al. Comparison of coronary CT angiography versus functional imaging for CABG patients: a resource utilization analysis. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2020;27:100494.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Min JK, Koduru S, Dunning AM, Cole JH, Hines JL, Greenwell D, et al. Coronary CT angiography versus myocardial perfusion imaging for near-term quality of life, cost and radiation exposure: a prospective multicenter randomized pilot trial. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2012;6(4):274–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Small GR, Chow BJ, Ruddy TD. Low-dose cardiac imaging: reducing exposure but not accuracy. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2012;10(1):89–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Small GR, Kazmi M, deKemp RA, Chow BJ. Established and emerging dose reduction methods in cardiac computed tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2011;18(4):570–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, Siebert U, Ikeno F, Bornschein B, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (fractional flow reserve versus angiography for multivessel evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(3):177–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Min JK, Leipsic J, Pencina MJ, Berman DS, Koo BK, van Mieghem C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. JAMA. 2012;308(12):1237–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Cardiology, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, 40 Ruskin Street, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

    Gary R. Small MB, ChB, PhD, MRCP & Benjamin J. W. Chow MD, FRCPC, FACC, FESC, FASNC, MSCCT

  2. Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

    Benjamin J. W. Chow MD, FRCPC, FACC, FESC, FASNC, MSCCT

  3. Cardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Canada

    Benjamin J. W. Chow MD, FRCPC, FACC, FESC, FASNC, MSCCT

Authors
  1. Gary R. Small MB, ChB, PhD, MRCP
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benjamin J. W. Chow MD, FRCPC, FACC, FESC, FASNC, MSCCT
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary R. Small MB, ChB, PhD, MRCP.

Ethics declarations

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.

Conflict of interest

Dr. Small has no financial relationships to disclose. Dr. Chow has received research and educational support from TeraRecon and has investment equity in GE.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Imaging

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Small, G.R., Chow, B.J.W. Imaging in CABG Patients. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 23, 45 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-021-00922-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-021-00922-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation