Journal of Nuclear Cardiology

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 229–243

Comprehensive cardiac CT study: Evaluation of coronary arteries, left ventricular function, and myocardial perfusion—Is it possible?

  • Ricardo C. Cury
  • Koen Nieman
  • Michael D. Shapiro
  • Khurram Nasir
  • Roberto C. Cury
  • Thomas J. Brady
Advances in Nonnuclear Imaging Technologies


With advances in multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) technology, the new generation of 64-slice MDCT scanners with submillimeter collimation and a faster gantry ratation allows imaging of the entire heart in a single breath-hold with excellent temporal and spatial resolution. This potentially permits a comprehensive assessment of coronary anatomy, left ventricular function, and myocardial perfusion. As will be seen in this review of the current literature regarding 16- and 64-slice MDCT, there is great promise for a comprehensive cardiac computed tomography (CT) study. The available data support the notion that CT coronary angiography may be an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in symptomatic patients with a low to intermediate likelihood of having coronary artery disease. By use of the same data acquired for CT coronary angiography, evaluation of global and regional left ventricular function and myocardial perfusion can be added to the MDCT evaluation without additional exposure to contrast medium or radiation and may provide a more conclusive cardiac workup in these patients. The potential applications and limitations of coronary stenosis detection, global and regional left ventricular function, and myocardial perfusion assessment by MDCT will be reviewed. The full potential of cardiac MDCT is just beginning to be realized.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Thom T, Haase N, Rosamond W, Howard VJ, Rumsfeld J, Manolio T, et al. American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart disease and stroke statistics—2006 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation 2006;113:85–151.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Achenbach S, Moshage W, Ropers D, Nossen J, Daniel WG. Value of electron-beam computed tomography for the noninvasive detection of high-grade coronary-artery stenoses and occlusions. N Engl J Med 1998;339:1964–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rensing BJ, Bongaerts A, van Geuns RJ, van Ooijen P, Oudkerk M, de Feyter PJ. Intravenous coronary angiography by electron beam computed tomography: a clinical evaluation. Circulation 1998;98:2509–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nieman K, Oudkerk M, Rensing BJ, et al. Coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography. Lancet 2001;357:599–603.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Achenbach S, Giesler T, Ropers D, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses by contrast-enhanced, retrospectively electrocardiographically-gated, multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2001;103:2535–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Knez A, Becker CR, Leber A, et al. Usefulness of multislice spiral computed tomography angiography for determination of coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol 2001;88:1191–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kopp AF, Schröder S, Kuettner A, et al. Non-invasive coronary angiography with high resolution multidetector-row computed tomography: results in 102 patients. Eur Heart J 2002;23: 1714–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H, Petersilka M, Gruber K, Suss C, et al. First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system [published erratum appears in Eur Radiol 2006: 16:1405]. Eur Radiol 2006;16:256–68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Plass A, Vachenauer R, Desbiolles L, Gaemperli O, et al. Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol 2006;16: 2739–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, et al. Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2002;106:2051–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ropers D, Baum U, Pohle K, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses with thin-slice multi-detector row spiral computed tomography and multiplanar reconstruction. Circulation 2003;107: 664–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D’Eliseo AD, et al. Accuracy of thin-slice computed tomography in the detection of coronary stenoses. Eur Heart J 2004;25:1043–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Cury RC, et al. Predictive value of 16-slice multidetector spiral computed tomography to detect significant obstructive coronary artery disease in patients at high risk for coronary artery disease: patient-versus segment-based analysis. Circulation 2004;110:2638–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Nieman K, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:2265–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoffmann MHK, Shi H, Schmitz BL, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography. JAMA 2005; 293:2471–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuettner A, Trabold T, Schroeder S, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary lesions using 16-detector multislice spiral computed tomography technology: initial clinical results. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1230–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Morgan-Hughes GJ, Roobottom CA, Owens PE, Marshall AJ. Highly accurate coronary angiography with submillimetre, 16 slice computed tomography. Heart 2005;91:308–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Liesbeth PS, et al. Noninvasive coronary imaging and assessment of left ventricular function using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2005;95:571–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nikolaou K, Rist C, Wintersperger BJ, et al. Clinical value of MDCT in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with a low pretest likelihood of significant disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:1659–68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Garcia MJ, Lessick J, Hoffmann MHK, et al. Accuracy of 16-row multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis. JAMA 2006;296:403–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cordeiro MA, Miller JM, Schmidt A, et al. Noninvasive half-millimeter 32-detector-row CT angiography accurately excludes significant stenoses in patients with advanced coronary artery disease and high calcium scores. Heart 2006;92:589–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, Desbiolles L, Grunenfelder J, Marincek B, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J 2005;26:1482–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, Becker A, Nikolaou K, Paul S, et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:147–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA, Runza G, McFadden EP, Baks T, et al. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 2005;112:2318–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raff GL, Gallagher MJ, O’Neill WW, Goldstein JA. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46:552–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schuijf JD, Pundziute G, Jukema JW. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multislice computed tomography in the non-invasive evaluation of significant coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 2006;98:145–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ropers D, Rixe J, Anders K. Usefulness of multidetector row spiral computed tomography with 64- × 0.6-mm collimation and 330-ms rotation for the noninvasive detection of significant coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol 2006;97:343–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ehara M, Surmely JF, Kawai M. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography for detecting angiographically significant coronary artery stenosis in an unselected consecutive patient population—comparison with conventional invasive angiography. Circ J 2006;70:564–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nikolaou K, Knez A, Rist C, et al. Accuracy of 64-MDCT in the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:111–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cury RC, Pomerantsev EV, Ferencik M, et al. Comparison of the degree of coronary stenoses by multidetector computed tomography versus by quantitative coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol 2005;96:784–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kefer J, Coche E, Legros G, et al. Head-to-head comparison of three-dimensional navigator-gated magnetic resonance imaging and 16-slice computed tomography to detect coronary artery stenosis in patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:92–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cury RC, Ferencik M, Achenbach S, Pomerantsev E, Nieman K, Moselewski F, et al. Accuracy of 16-slice multi-detector CT to quantify the degree of coronary artery stenosis: assessment of cross-sectional and longitudinal vessel reconstructions. Eur J Radiol 2006;57:345–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gilard M, Cornily JC, Pennec PY, Joret C, Le Gal G, Mansourati J, et al. Accuracy of multislice computed tomography in the preoperative assessment of coronary disease in patients with aortic valve stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:2020–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, Van Mieghem CA, Kluin J, Weustink AC, Pugliese F, et al. Pre-operative computed tomography coronary angiography to detect significant coronary artery disease in patients referred for cardiac valve surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:1658–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hoffmann U, Nagurney JT, Moselewski F, Pena A, Ferencik M, Chae CU, et al. Coronary multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of patients with acute chest pain. Circulation 2006;114:2251–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gallagher MJ, Ross MA, Raff GL, Goldstein JA, O’Neill WW, O’Neil B. The diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography compared with stress nuclear imaging in emergency department low-risk chest pain patients. Ann Emerg Med 2007;49:125–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    White CS, Kuo D, Kelemen M, Jain V, Musk A, Zaidi E, et al. Chest pain evaluation in the emergency department: can MDCT provide a comprehensive evaluation? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;185:533–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Schroeder S, Kopp AF, Baumbach A, Meisner C, Kuettner A, Georg C, et al. Noninvasive detection and evaluation of atherosclerotic coronary plaques with multislice computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:1430–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schoenhagen P, Tuzcu EM, Stillman AE, Moliterno DJ, Halliburton SS, Kuzmiak SA, et al. Non-invasive assessment of plaque morphology and remodeling in mildly stenotic coronary segments: comparison of 16-slice computed tomography and intravascular ultrasound. Coron Artery Dis 2003;14:459–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Achenbach S, Moselewski F, Ropers D, Ferencik M, Hoffmann U, MacNeill B, 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.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Leber AW, Knez A, Becker A, Becker C, von Ziegler F, Nikolaou K, et al. Accuracy of multidetector spiral computed tomography in identifying and differentiating the composition of coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a comparative study with intracoronary ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:1241–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Becker CR, Nikolaou K, Muders M, Babaryka G, Crispin A, Schoepf UJ, et al. Ex vivo coronary atherosclerotic plaque characterization with multi-detector-row CT. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:2094–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pohle K, Achenbach S, Macneill B, Ropers D, Ferencik M, Moselewski F, et al. Characterization of non-calcified coronary atherosclerotic plaque by multi-detector row CT: comparison to IVUS. Atherosclerosis 2007;190:174–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cademartiri F, Mollet NR, Runza G, Bruining N, Hamers R, Somers P, 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.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Greenland P, Bonow RO, Brundage BH, Budoff MJ, Eisenberg MJ, Grundy SM, et al. ACCF/AHA 2007 clinical expert consensus document on coronary artery calcium scoring by computed tomography in global cardiovascular risk assessment and in evaluation of patients with chest pain. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force (ACCF/AHA Writing Committee to Update the 2000 Expert Consensus Document on Electron Beam Computed Tomography). Circulation 2007;115:402–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ropers D, Ulzheimer S, Wenkel E, et al. Investigation of aortocoronary artery bypass grafts by multislice computed tomography with electrocardiographic-gated image reconstruction. Am J Card 2001;88:792–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Yoo KJ, Choi D, Choi BW, Lim SH, Chang BC. The comparison of the graft patency after coronary artery bypass grafting using coronary angiography and multislice computed tomography. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2003;24:86–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nieman K, Rensing BJ, van Geuns RJ, Munne A, Ligthart JM, Pattynama PM, et al. Usefulness of multislice computed tomography for detecting obstructive coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 2002;89:913–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Marano R, Storto ML, Maddestra N, Bonomo L. Non-invasive assessment of coronary artery bypass graft with retrospectively ECG-gated four-row multi-detector spiral computed tomography. Eur Radiol 2004;14:1353–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Schlosser T, Konorza T, Hunold P, Kuhl H, Schmermund A, Barkhausen J. Noninvasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts using 16-detector row computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1224–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D’Eliseo A, Tomassini M, Razzini C, Sperandio M, et al. Evaluation of venous and arterial conduit patency by 16-slice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2004;110:3234–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Burgstahler C, Beck T, Kuettner A, Drosch T, Kopp AF, Heuschmid M, et al. Non-invasive evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts using 16-row multi-slice computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. Int J Cardiol 2006; 106:244–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Salm LP, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Schuijf JD, Vliegen HW, Lamb HJ, et al. Comprehensive assessment of patients after coronary artery bypass grafting by 16-detector-row computed tomography. Am Heart J 2005;150:775–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Anders K, Baum U, Schmid M, Ropers D, Schmid A, Pohle K, et al. Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) patency: assessment with high-resolution submillimeter 16-slice multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) versus coronary angiography. Eur J Radiol 2006;57:336–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Stauder NI, Kuttner A, Schroder S, Drosch T, Beck T, Stauder H, et al. Coronary artery bypass grafts: assessment of graft patency and native coronary artery lesions using 16-slice MDCT. Eur Radiol 2006;16:2512–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Pache G, Sauerssig U, Frydrychowicz A, Foell D, Ghanem N, Kotter E, et al. Initial experience with 64-slice cardiac CT: non-invasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts. Eur Heart J 2006;27:976–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Malagutti P, Nieman K, Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CA, Pugliese F, Cademartiri F, et al. Use of 64-slice CT in symptomatic patients after coronary bypass surgery: evaluation of grafts and coronary arteries. Eur Heart J. In press 2007.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ropers D, Pohle FK, Kuettner A, Pflederer T, Anders K, Daniel WG, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography in patients after bypass surgery using 64-slice spiral computed tomography with 330-ms gantry rotation. Circulation 2006;114:2334–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama P, de Feyter P. Noninvasive angiographic evaluation of coronary stents with multi-slice spiral computed tomography. Herz 2003;28:136–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Maintz D, Seifarth H, Raupach R, Flohr T, Rink M, Sommer T, et al. 64-slice multidetector coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 68 different stents. Eur Radiol 2006;16:818–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gaspar T, Halon DA, Lewis BS, Adawi S, Schliamser JE, Rubinshtein R, et al. Diagnosis of coronary in-stent restenosis with multidetector row spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1573–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Cademartiri F, Mollet N, Lemos PA, Pugliese F, Baks T, McFadden EP, et al. Usefulness of multislice computed tomographic coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 2005;96:799–802.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Rixe J, Achenbach S, Ropers D, Baum U, Kuettner A, Ropers U, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent restenosis by 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography. Eur Heart J 2006;27: 2567–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Kitagawa T, Fujii T, Tomohiro Y, Maeda K, Kobayashi M, Kunita E, et al. Noninvasive assessment of coronary stents in patients by 16-slice computed tomography. Int J Cardiol 2006; 109:188–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gilard M, Cornily JC, Rioufol G, Finet G, Pennec PY, Mansourati J, et al. Noninvasive assessment of left main coronary stent patency with 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2005;95:110–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Van Mieghem CA, Cademartiri F, Mollet NR, Malagutti P, Valgimigli M, Meijboom WB, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography for the evaluation of stent patency after left main coronary artery stenting: a comparison with conventional coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 2006; 114:645–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Gotte MJ, Germans T, Russel IK, Zwanenburg JJ, Marcus JT, van Rossum AC, et al. Myocardial strain and torsion quantified by cardiovascular magnetic resonance tissue tagging: studies in normal and impaired left ventricular function. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2002–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Grothues F, Smith GC, Moon JC, Bellenger NG, Collins P, Klein HU, et al. Comparison of interstudy reproducibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance with two-dimensional echocardiography in normal subjects and in patients with heart failure of left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Cardiol 2002;90:29–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Orakzai SH, Orakzai RH, Nasir K, Budoff MJ. Assessment of cardiac function using multidetector row computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006;30:555–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Juergens KU, Fischbach R. Left ventricular function studied with MDCT. Eur Radiol 2006;16:342–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Mahnken AH, Wildberger JE, Koos R, Gunther RW. Multislice spiral computed tomography of the heart: technique, current applications, and perspective. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2005; 28:388–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Juergens KU, Grude M, Maintz D, Fallenberg EM, Wichter T, Heindel W, et al. Multi-detector row CT of left ventricular function with dedicated analysis software versus MR imaging: initial experience. Radiology 2004;230:403–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Juergens KU, Grude M, Fallenberg EM, Opitz C, Wichter T, Heindel W, et al. Using ECG-gated multidetector CT to evaluate global left ventricular myocardial function in patients with coronary artery disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179: 1545–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Juergens KU, Seifarth H, Maintz D, Grude M, Ozgun M, Wichter T, et al. MDCT determination of volume and function of the left ventricle: are short-axis image reformations necessary? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:S371–8.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Yamamuro M, Tadamura E, Kubo S, Toyoda H, Nishina T, Ohba M, et al. Cardiac functional analysis with multi-detector row CT and segmental reconstruction algorithm: comparison with echocardiography, SPECT, and MR imaging. Radiology 2005;234: 381–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Spuentrup E, Busch P, Wildberger JE, et al. Sixteen-slice spiral CT versus MR imaging for the assessment of left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction. Eur Radiol 2005;15:714–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Raman SV, Shah M, McCarthy B, Garcia A, Ferketich AK. Multi-detector row cardiac computed tomography accurately quantifies right and left ventricular size and function compared with cardiac magnetic resonance. Am Heart J 2006;151:736–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Belge B, Coche E, Pasquet A, Vanoverschelde JL, Gerber BL. Accurate estimation of global and regional cardiac function by retrospectively gated multidetector row computed tomography: comparison with cine magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 2006;16:1424–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Salm LP, Schuijf JD, de Roos A, Lamb HJ, Vliegen HW, Jukema JW, et al. Global and regional left ventricular function assessment with 16-detector row CT: comparison with echocardiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Eur J Echocardiogr 2006; 7:308–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Schepis T, Gaemperli O, Koepfli P, Valenta I, Strobel K, Brunner A, et al. Comparison of 64-slice CT with gated SPECT for evaluation of left ventricular function. J Nucl Med 2006;47: 1288–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, et al. American Heart Association Writing Group on Myocardial Segmentation and Registration for Cardiac Imaging. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart: a statement for healtheare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. J Nucl Cardiol 2002;9:240–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Dirksen MS, Bax JJ, de Roos A, Jukema JW, van der Geest RJ, Geleijns K, et al. Usefulness of dynamic multislice computed tomography of left ventricular function in unstable angina pectoris and comparison with echocardiography. Am J Cardiol 2002; 90:1157–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Mahnken AH, Spuentrup E, Niethammer M, Buecker A, Boese J, Wildberger JE, et al. Quantitative and qualitative assessment of left ventricular volume with ECG-gated multislice spiral CT: value of different image reconstruction algorithms in comparison to MRI. Acta Radiol 2003;44:604–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Dirksen MS, Jukema JW, Bax JJ, Lamb HJ, Boersma E, Tuinenburg JC, et al. Cardiac multidetector-row computed tomography in patients with unstable angina. Am J Cardiol 2005;95:457–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Fischbach R, Juergens KU, Ozgun M, Maintz D, Grude M, Seifarth H, et al. Assessment of regional left ventricular function with multidetector-row computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. In press 2007.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, Wintersperger BJ, Leber AW, von Ziegler F, Rist C, et al. Dual-source CT cardiac imaging: initial experience. Eur Radiol 2006;16:1409–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Jakobs TF, Becker CR, Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Suess C, Schoepf UJ, et al. Multislice helical CT of the heart with retropeective ECG gating: reduction of radiation exposure by ECG-controlled tube current modulation. Eur Radiol 2002;12:1081–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Higgins CB, Sovak M, Schmidt W, Siemers PT. Uptake of contrast materials by experimental acute myocardial infarctions: a preliminary report. Invest Radiol 1978;13:337–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Higgins CB, Sovak M, Schmidt W, Siemers PT. Differential accumulation of radiopaque contrast material in acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 1979;43:47–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Hoffmann U, Millea R, Enzweiler C, Ferencik M, Gulick S, Titus J, et al. Acute myocardial infarction: contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT in a porcine model. Radiology 2004;231:697–701.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Mahnken AH, Bruners P, Katoh M, Wildberger JE, Gunther RW, Buecker A. Dynamic multi-section CT imaging in acute myocardial infarction: preliminary animal experience. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:746–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Nikolaou K, Sanz J, Poon M, Wintersperger BJ, Ohnesorge B, Rius T, et al. Assessment of myocardial perfusion and viability from routine contrast-enhanced 16-detector-row computed tomography of the heart: preliminary results. Eur Radiol 2005;15: 864–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Nieman K, Cury RC, Ferencik M, Nomura CH, Abbara S, Hoffmann U, et al. Differentiation of recent and chronic myocardial infarction by cardiac computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2006;98:303–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Lima JA, Judd RM, Bazille A, et al. Regional heterogeneity of human myocardial infarcts demonstrated by contrast-enhanced MRI: potential mechanisms. Circulation 1995;92:1117–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Rochitte C, Lima J, Bluemke D, et al. Magnitude and time course of microvascular obstruction and tissue injury after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1998;98:1006–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Lardo AC, Cordeiro MA, Silva C, Amado LC, George RT, Saliaris AP, et al. Contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography viability imaging after myocardial infarction: characterization of myocyte death, microvascular obstruction, and chronic scar. Circulation 2006;113:394–404.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Gerber BL, Belge B, Legros GJ, Lim P, Poncelet A, Pasquet A, et al. Characterization of acute and chronic myocardial infarcts by multidetector computed tomography: comparison with contrastenhanced magnetic resonance. Circulation 2006;113:823–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Wildberger JE, Spuentrup E, Buecker A, et al. Assessment of myocardial viability in reperfused acute myocardial infarction using 16-slice computed tomography in comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:2042–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Wada H, Kobavashi Y, Yasu T, Tsukamoto Y, Kobayashi N, Ishida T, et al. Multi-detector computed tomography for imaging of subendocardial infarction: prediction of wall motion recovery after reperfused anterior myocardial infarction. Circ J 2004; 68:512–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Koyama Y, Matsuoka H, Mochizuki T, Higashino H, Kawakami H, Nakata S, et al. Assessment of reperfused acute myocardial infarction with two-phase contrast-enhanced helical CT: prediction of left ventricular function and wall thickness. Radiology 2005;235:804–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    George RT, Silva C, Cordeiro MA, DiPaula A, Thompson DR, McCarthy WF, et al. Multidetector computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging during adenosine stress. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:153–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS, Carr JJ, Goldin JG, Greenland P, et al. Assessment of coronary artery disease by cardiac computed tomography: a scientifie statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and Committee on Cardiac Imaging, Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation 2006;114:1761–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Hosoi S, Mochizuki T, Miyagawa M, Shen Y, Murase K, Ikezoe J. Assessment of left ventricular volumes using multi-detector row computed tomography (MDCT): phantom and human studies. Radiat Med 2003;21:62–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Hundt W, Siebert K, Wintersperger BJ, Becker CR, Knez A, Reiser MF, et al. Assessment of global left ventricular function: comparison of cardiac multidetector-row computed tomography with angiocardiography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005;29:373–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Salm LP, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, van der Wall EE, et al. Noninvasive coronary imaging and assessment of left ventricular function using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2005;95:571–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Salm LP, de Roos A, et al. Assessment of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction with 16-slice multi-slice computed tomography; comparison with 2D-echocardiography. Int J Cardiol 2007;116:201–205.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Halliburton SS, Petersilka M, Schvartzman PR, Obuchowski N, White RD. Evaluation of left ventricular dysfunction using multiphasic reconstructions of coronary multi-slice computed tomography data in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease: validation against cine magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2003;19:73–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Grude M, Juergens KU, Wichter T, Paul M, Fallenberg EM, Muller JG, et al. Evaluation of global left ventricular myocardial function with electrocardiogram-gated multidetector computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 2003;38:653–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Koch K, Oellig F, Kunz P, Bender P, Oberholzer K, Mildenberger P, et al. Assessment of global and regional left ventricular function with a 16-slice spiral-CT using two different software tools for quantitative functional analysis and qualitative evaluation of wall motion changes in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Rofo 2004;176:1786–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ricardo C. Cury
    • 1
    • 2
  • Koen Nieman
    • 3
  • Michael D. Shapiro
    • 1
    • 2
  • Khurram Nasir
    • 1
    • 2
  • Roberto C. Cury
    • 4
  • Thomas J. Brady
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Cardiac MRI-PET-CT ProgramMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical SchoolBoston
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyMassachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBoston
  3. 3.Department of Cardiology, Thorax CentreErasmus Medical CenterRotterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of Cardiology, Heart Institute (InCor)University of Sao PauloSao PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations