CT Myocardial Perfusion Imaging: Clinical Implementation

Part of the Medical Radiology book series (MEDRAD)


Despite advances, diagnosis of coronary artery diseases with coronary CT angiography (CCTA) is still hampered by artifacts from coronary artery calcium, stents, and cardiac motion. Recent CT techniques have enabled stress myocardial perfusion assessment in patients with ischemic heart diseases. Stress perfusion CT and CCTA can provide information on coronary artery anatomy and flow-limiting stenosis. CT perfusion information enhances the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA and may help to identify lesions appropriate for coronary intervention. CT perfusion is a potential economic alternative of other functional studies currently used in the evaluation of ischemic heart diseases.


Myocardial Perfusion Positive Predictive Value Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Negative Predictive Value Myocardial Blood Flow 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bamberg F, Klotz E, Flohr T, Becker A, Becker CR, Schmidt B, Wintersperger BJ, Reiser MF, Nikolaou K (2010) Dynamic myocardial stress perfusion imaging using fast dual-source CT with alternating table positions: initial experience. Eur Radiol 20:1168–1173. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1715-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bamberg F, Becker A, Schwarz F, Marcus RP, Greif M, von Ziegler F, Blankstein R, Hoffmann U, Sommer WH, Hoffmann VS, Johnson TR, Becker HC, Wintersperger BJ, Reiser MF, Nikolaou K (2011) Detection of hemodynamically significant coronary artery stenosis: incremental diagnostic value of dynamic CT-based myocardial perfusion imaging. Radiology 260:689–698. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11110638 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bamberg F, Hinkel R, Schwarz F, Sandner TA, Baloch E, Marcus R, Becker A, Kupatt C, Wintersperger BJ, Johnson TR, Theisen D, Klotz E, Reiser MF, Nikolaou K (2012) Accuracy of dynamic computed tomography adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging in estimating myocardial blood flow at various degrees of coronary artery stenosis using a porcine animal model. Invest Radiol 47:71–77. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31823fd42b PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastarrika G, Ramos-Duran L, Rosenblum MA, Kang DK, Rowe GW, Schoepf UJ (2010) Adenosine-stress dynamic myocardial CT perfusion imaging: initial clinical experience. Invest Radiol 45:306–313. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181dfa2f2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bettencourt N, Rocha J, Ferreira N, Pires-Morais G, Carvalho M, Leite D, Melica B, Santos L, Rodrigues A, Braga P, Teixeira M, Simoes L, Leite-Moreira A, Cardoso S, Nagel E, Gama V (2011) Incremental value of an integrated adenosine stress-rest MDCT perfusion protocol for detection of obstructive coronary artery disease. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 5:392–405. doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2011.10.002 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blankstein R, Shturman LD, Rogers IS, Rocha-Filho JA, Okada DR, Sarwar A, Soni AV, Bezerra H, Ghoshhajra BB, Petranovic M, Loureiro R, Feuchtner G, Gewirtz H, Hoffmann U, Mamuya WS, Brady TJ, Cury RC (2009) Adenosine-induced stress myocardial perfusion imaging using dual-source cardiac computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 54:1072–1084. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.06.014 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blankstein R, Jerosch-Herold M (2010) Stress myocardial perfusion imaging by computed tomography a dynamic road is ahead. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:821–823. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2010.06.008 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Choe YH, Choo KS, Jeon ES, Gwon HC, Choi JH, Park JE (2008) Comparison of MDCT and MRI in the detection and sizing of acute and chronic myocardial infarcts. Eur J Radiol 66:292–299. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.06.010 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cury RC, Magalhaes TA, Paladino AT, Shiozaki AA, Perini M, Senra T, Lemos PA, Rochitte CE (2011) Dipyridamole stress and rest transmural myocardial perfusion ratio evaluation by 64 detector-row computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 5:443–448. doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2011.10.012 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feuchtner G, Goetti R, Plass A, Wieser M, Scheffel H, Wyss C, Stolzmann P, Donati O, Schnabl J, Falk V, Alkadhi H, Leschka S, Cury RC (2011) Adenosine stress high-pitch 128-slice dual-source myocardial computed tomography perfusion for imaging of reversible myocardial ischemia: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 4:540–549. doi: 10.1161/circimaging.110.961250 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fox K, Garcia MA, Ardissino D, Buszman P, Camici PG, Crea F, Daly C, De Backer G, Hjemdahl P, Lopez-Sendon J, Marco J, Morais J, Pepper J, Sechtem U, Simoons M, Thygesen K, Priori SG, Blanc JJ, Budaj A, Camm J, Dean V, Deckers J, Dickstein K, Lekakis J, McGregor K, Metra M, Osterspey A, Tamargo J, Zamorano JL (2006) Guidelines on the management of stable angina pectoris: executive summary: the task force on the management of stable angina pectoris of the European society of cardiology. Eur Heart J 27:1341–1381. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl001 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Garnock-Jones KP, Curran MP (2010) Regadenoson. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 10:65–71. doi: 10.2165/10489040-000000000-00000 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. George RT, Silva C, Cordeiro MA, DiPaula A, Thompson DR, McCarthy WF, Ichihara T, Lima JA, Lardo AC (2006) Multidetector computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging during adenosine stress. J Am Coll Cardiol 48:153–160. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.04.014 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, Kitagawa K, Chang HJ, Bluemke DA, Becker L, Yousuf O, Texter J, Lardo AC, Lima JA (2009) Adenosine stress 64- and 256-row detector computed tomography angiography and perfusion imaging: a pilot study evaluating the transmural extent of perfusion abnormalities to predict atherosclerosis causing myocardial ischemia. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2:174–182. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.108.813766 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ghoshhajra BB, Rogers IS, Maurovich-Horvat P, Techasith T, Verdini D, Sidhu MS, Drzezga NK, Medina HM, Blankstein R, Brady TJ, Cury RC (2011) A comparison of reconstruction and viewing parameters on image quality and accuracy of stress myocardial CT perfusion. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 5:459–466. doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2011.10.011 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gorenoi V, Schonermark MP, Hagen A (2012) CT coronary angiography vs. invasive coronary angiography in CHD. GMS Health Technol Assess 8:Doc02. doi: 10.3205/hta000100
  17. Groothuis JG, Beek AM, Brinckman SL, Meijerink MR, Koestner SC, Nijveldt R, Gotte MJ, Hofman MB, van Kuijk C, van Rossum AC (2010) Low to intermediate probability of coronary artery disease: comparison of coronary CT angiography with first-pass MR myocardial perfusion imaging. Radiology 254:384–392. doi: 10.1148/radiol.09090802 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hamon M, Fau G, Nee G, Ehtisham J, Morello R (2010) Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance for detection of coronary artery disease. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 12:29. doi: 10.1186/1532-429x-12-29 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hamon MMR, Riddell JW, Hamon M (2007) Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography—meta-analysis. Radiology 245(3):720–731PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ho KT, Chua KC, Klotz E, Panknin C (2010) Stress and rest dynamic myocardial perfusion imaging by evaluation of complete time-attenuation curves with dual-source CT. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:811–820. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2010.05.009 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones WS, Patel MR, Holleran SA, Harrison JK, O’Connor CM, Phillips HR 3rd (2011) Trends in the use of diagnostic coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, and coronary artery bypass graft surgery across North Carolina. Am Heart J 162:932–937. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.08.015 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kirschbaum SW, Nieman K, Springeling T, Weustink AC, Ramcharitar S, Mieghem C, Rossi A, Duckers E, Serruys PW, Boersma E, de Feyter PJ, van Geuns RJ (2011) Non-invasive diagnostic workup of patients with suspected stable angina by combined computed tomography coronary angiography and magnetic resonance perfusion imaging. Circ J 75:1678–1684PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kitagawa K, George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, Lima JA, Lardo AC (2010) Characterization and correction of beam-hardening artifacts during dynamic volume CT assessment of myocardial perfusion. Radiology 256:111–118. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10091399 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ko BS, Cameron JD, Meredith IT, Leung M, Antonis PR, Nasis A, Crossett M, Hope SA, Lehman SJ, Troupis J, DeFrance T, Seneviratne SK (2012a) Computed tomography stress myocardial perfusion imaging in patients considered for revascularization: a comparison with fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J 33:67–77. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr268 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ko SM, Choi JW, Song MG, Shin JK, Chee HK, Chung HW, Kim DH (2011) Myocardial perfusion imaging using adenosine-induced stress dual-energy computed tomography of the heart: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and conventional coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 21:26–35. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1897-1 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ko SM, Choi JW, Hwang HK, Song MG, Shin JK, Chee HK (2012b) 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 Am J Roentgenol 198:512–520. doi: 10.2214/ajr.11.7029 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Koo BK, Erglis A, Doh JH, Daniels DV, Jegere S, Kim HS, Dunning A, DeFrance T, Lansky A, Leipsic J, Min JK (2011) 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 58:1989–1997. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.066 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kristensen TS, Engstrom T, Kelbaek H, von der Recke P, Nielsen MB, Kofoed KF (2010) Correlation between coronary computed tomographic angiography and fractional flow reserve. Int J Cardiol 144:200–205. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.04.024 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lindstaedt M, Mugge A (2011) Myocardial fractional flow reserve. Its role in guiding PCI in stable coronary artery disease. Herz 36:410–416. doi: 10.1007/s00059-011-3486-8 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lockie T, Ishida M, Perera D, Chiribiri A, De Silva K, Kozerke S, Marber M, Nagel E, Rezavi R, Redwood S, Plein S (2011) High-resolution magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging at 3.0-Tesla to detect hemodynamically significant coronary stenoses as determined by fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 57:70–75. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.09.019 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mahnken AH, Klotz E, Pietsch H, Schmidt B, Allmendinger T, Haberland U, Kalender WA, Flohr T (2010) Quantitative whole heart stress perfusion CT imaging as noninvasive assessment of hemodynamics in coronary artery stenosis: preliminary animal experience. Invest Radiol 45:298–305. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181dfa3cf PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Melikian N, De Bondt P, Tonino P, De Winter O, Wyffels E, Bartunek J, Heyndrickx GR, Fearon WF, Pijls NH, Wijns W, De Bruyne B (2010) Fractional flow reserve and myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with angiographic multivessel coronary artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 3:307–314. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2009.12.010 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mowatt G, Cummins E, Waugh N, Walker S, Cook J, Jia X, Hillis GS, Fraser C (2008) Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in the investigation of coronary artery disease. Health Technol Assess 12:iii–iv, ix–143Google Scholar
  34. Nagao M, Kido T, Watanabe K, Saeki H, Okayama H, Kurata A, Hosokawa K, Higashino H, Mochizuki T (2011) Functional assessment of coronary artery flow using adenosine stress dual-energy CT: a preliminary study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 27:471–481. doi: 10.1007/s10554-010-9676-2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nakauchi Y, Iwanaga Y, Ikuta S, Kudo M, Kobuke K, Murakami T, Miyazaki S (2012) Quantitative myocardial perfusion analysis using multi-row detector CT in acute myocardial infarction. Heart 98:566–572. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300915 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, Boersma E, Bech JW, van’t Veer M, Bar F, Hoorntje J, Koolen J, WijnsW J, de Bruyne B (2007) Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 49:2105–2111. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.01.087 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, Siebert U, Ikeno F, Bornschein B, van’t Veer M, Klauss V, Manoharan G, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Ver Lee PN, MacCarthy PA, De Bruyne B (2010) 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 56:177–184. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.04.012 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pijls NH, Sels JW (2012) Functional measurement of coronary stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 59:1045–1057. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.09.077 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rocha-Filho JA, Blankstein R, Shturman LD, Bezerra HG, Okada DR, Rogers IS, Ghoshhajra B, Hoffmann U, Feuchtner G, Mamuya WS, Brady TJ, Cury RC (2010) Incremental value of adenosine-induced stress myocardial perfusion imaging with dual-source CT at cardiac CT angiography. Radiology 254:410–419. doi: 10.1148/radiol.09091014 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ruzsics B, Schwarz F, Schoepf UJ, Lee YS, Bastarrika G, Chiaramida SA, Costello P, Zwerner PL (2009) Comparison of dual-energy 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 104:318–326. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.03.051 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Scheffel H, Stolzmann P, Alkadhi H, Azemaj N, Plass A, Baumueller S, Desbiolles L, Leschka S, Kozerke S, Falk V, Boesiger P, Wyss C, Marincek B, Donati OF (2010) Low-dose CT and cardiac MR for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: accuracy of single and combined approaches. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 26:579–590. doi: 10.1007/s10554-010-9595-2 Google Scholar
  42. Schuijf JD, Wijns W, Jukema JW, Atsma DE, de Roos A, Lamb HJ, Stokkel MP, Dibbets-Schneider P, Decramer I, De Bondt P, van der Wall EE, Vanhoenacker PK, Bax JJ (2006) Relationship between noninvasive coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 48:2508–2514. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.05.080 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schwitter J, Wacker CM, Wilke N, Al-Saadi N, Sauer E, Huettle K, Schonberg SO, Luchner A, Strohm O, Ahlstrom H, Dill T, Hoebel N, Simor T (2012) MR-IMPACT II: magnetic resonance imaging for myocardial perfusion assessment in coronary artery disease trial: perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance vs. single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparative multicentre, multivendor trial. Eur Heart J. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs022 Google Scholar
  44. Sharples L, Hughes V, Crean A, Dyer M, Buxton M, Goldsmith K, Stone D (2007) Cost-effectiveness of functional cardiac testing in the diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease: a randomised controlled trial. The CECaT trial. Health Technol Assess 11:iii–iv, ix–115Google Scholar
  45. Shikata F, Imagawa H, Kawachi K, Kido T, Kurata A, Inoue Y, Hosokawa K, Nagao M, Higashino H, Mochizuki T, Ryugo M, Nagashima M (2010) Regional myocardial blood flow measured by stress multidetector computed tomography as a predictor of recovery of left ventricular function after coronary artery bypass grafting. Am Heart J 160:528–534. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2010.06.026 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tamarappoo BK, Dey D, Nakazato R, Shmilovich H, Smith T, Cheng VY, Thomson LE, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Germano G, Slomka PJ, Berman DS (2010) Comparison of the extent and severity of myocardial perfusion defects measured by CT coronary angiography and SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:1010–1019. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2010.07.011 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, Mark D, Min J, O’Gara P, Rubin GD (2010) 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 4(407):e401–e433. doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2010.11.001 Google Scholar
  48. Tonino PA, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, Oldroyd KG, Leesar MA, Ver Lee PN, Maccarthy PA, Van’t Veer M, Pijls NH (2010) Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol 55:2816–2821. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.096 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. van de Hoef TP, Nolte F, Rolandi MC, Piek JJ, van den Wijngaard JP, Spaan JA, Siebes M (2012) Coronary pressure-flow relations as basis for the understanding of coronary physiology. J Mol Cell Cardiol 52:786–793. doi: 10.1016/j.yjmcc.2011.07.025 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. van Werkhoven JM, Heijenbrok MW, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, van der Wall EE, Schreur JH, Bax JJ (2010) Combined non-invasive anatomical and functional assessment with MSCT and MRI for the detection of significant coronary artery disease in patients with an intermediate pre-test likelihood. Heart 96:425–431. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2009.179531 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Verani M (2000) Stress approaches: techniques. In: Pohost G, O’Rourke R, Berman D, Shah P (eds) Imaging in cardiovascular disease, 1st edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 151–158Google Scholar
  52. Wang Y, Qin L, Shi X, Zeng Y, Jing H, Schoepf UJ, Jin Z (2012) Adenosine-stress dynamic myocardial perfusion imaging with second-generation dual-source CT: comparison with conventional catheter coronary angiography and SPECT nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:521–529. doi: 10.2214/ajr.11.7830 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Weininger M, Schoepf UJ, Ramachandra A, Fink C, Rowe GW, Costello P, Henzler T (2010) 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. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.11.022 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Cardiovascular Imaging Center, Samsung Medical CenterSungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations