doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.629808
(Circulation. 2007;115:1464-1480.)
© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.
New Drugs and Technologies |
New Technology for Noninvasive Evaluation of Coronary Artery Disease
From the Divisions of Nuclear Medicine/PET and Cardiovascular Imaging, Departments of Radiology and Medicine (M.F.D.C.), Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass, and the Division of Cardiology (R.H.), University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif.
Correspondence to Marcelo F. Di Carli, MD, Division of Nuclear Medicine/PET, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail mdicarli{at}partners.org
Key Words: coronary disease • imaging • tomography
 |
Introduction |
|---|
 Top Introduction Conceptual Framework of...Evaluation of Obstructive CADEvaluation of Myocardial...Technology TrendsSummaryReferences |
|---|
Cardiac computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) are emerging as powerful noninvasive imaging tools for the evaluation of atherosclerosis in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Unlike invasive coronary angiography, CT coronary angiography (CTA) not only assesses disease within the coronary lumen but can also provide direct qualitative and quantitative information about nonobstructive atherosclerotic plaque burden within the vessel wall. Thus, it is possible that CTA-based patient evaluation may provide more clinically relevant information on which to base risk assessments compared with conventional "lumenography." On the other hand, PET is rapidly growing as a powerful and efficient alternative to conventional single-photon emission CT (SPECT) imaging to evaluate regional myocardial perfusion and metabolism in patients with CAD. In addition, PET scanners are now being converted to hybrid PET/CT devices, which, in the setting of CAD, offer the potential for a comprehensive noninvasive cardiac evaluation of anatomy and function. This review will discuss current and potential future applications of cardiovascular CT, PET, and hybrid PET/CT, with a particular focus on ischemic heart disease.
|
Conceptual Framework of Noninvasive Imaging Strategies for CAD |
|---|
|
TopIntroductionConceptual Framework of...Evaluation of Obstructive CADEvaluation of Myocardial...Technology TrendsSummaryReferences |
|---|
The information provided by noninvasive imaging generally falls into 1 of 3 categories: myocardial perfusion, left ventricular (LV) function, or coronary artery anatomy. The clinical utility, value, and role of a noninvasive modality are based on 2 test characteristics: What type of information is provided (eg, stress perfusion, stress and/or rest LV function, coronary anatomy), and what is the accuracy of the information provided. For example, SPECT and PET both provide stress and rest perfusion information, but the latter will be a superior clinical tool if the imaging data better represent the actual defect size and are subject to less artifact. The advantage of PET over SPECT will be further enhanced, as will be discussed later, if it provides additional clinically relevant information not provided by SPECT, such as coronary flow reserve data. On the other hand, CTA represents the first means to assess anatomic CAD noninvasively and thus is a potential replacement for invasive angiography. Additionally, CTA is also a means to assess atherosclerosis, both with respect to its presence and potentially to define plaque morphology.
In considering the potential clinical application of these modalities, the evidence supporting the role of assessment of ischemia versus anatomy must be considered. Data from the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry have shown that even in the setting of anatomic multivessel CAD, a survival benefit from revascularization compared with medical therapy only occurred in the setting of ECG evidence of ischemia, poor exercise tolerance, or both.1,2 A similar finding has been reported more recently with stress SPECT imaging.3 On the other hand, evidence exists that survival after catheterization is a function of the anatomic extent of CAD (1, 2, or 3 vessels), stenosis severity, location of stenoses, and presence of left anterior descending coronary artery disease, and thus is a surrogate of the extent of jeopardized myocardium.4 Although CTA shares the limitations of anatomic assessments (and has additional intrinsic limitations of its own), it also provides objective estimates of atherosclerosis burden and potentially of plaque morphology, and thus, it may have an important clinical role. Hence, although a pathophysiology-based approach may continue to play an important role in decisions on revascularization, the anatomy-based approach may provide important clinical information to define the goals of medical therapy.
|
Evaluation of Obstructive CAD |
|---|
|
TopIntroductionConceptual Framework of...Evaluation of Obstructive CADEvaluation of Myocardial...Technology TrendsSummaryReferences |
|---|
CT Coronary Angiography
Using state-of-the-art technology in carefully selected patients, it is possible to obtain high-quality images of the coronary arteries (Figure 1). Table 1 summarizes the current evidence5–25 supporting a role for CTA with 16- and 64-slice CT scanners in the diagnosis of CAD. The series published to date are limited to selected cohorts that consisted of stable patients with known or suspected CAD who were undergoing elective catheterization and who were recruited to also undergo CTA. Hence, reported accuracies of CTA to date should be interpreted in light of the relatively narrow range of CAD likelihood in patients examined (ie, high or intermediate-high), as evidenced by the high prevalence of obstructive CAD in these series (62%; range 25% to 91%). In these series, results are generally limited to relatively large vessel sizes (
1.5 mm), which excludes the results of smaller or uninterpretable vessels (generally distal vessels and side branches), the inclusion of which lowers sensitivity.
|
|
On a per-patient basis, the average weighted sensitivity for detecting at least 1 coronary artery with >50% stenosis is 94% (range 75% to 100%), whereas the average specificity is 77% (range 49% to 100%). The corresponding average positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) are 84% (range 50% to 100%) and 87% (range 35% to 100%), respectively, and the overall diagnostic accuracy is 89% (range 68% to 100%; Table 1). On a per-segment basis, the average weighted sensitivity for detecting at least 1 coronary artery with >50% stenosis is 83% (range 30% to 99%), whereas the average specificity is 92% (range 64% to 98%). The corresponding average PPV and NPV are 67% (range 14% to 91%) and 97% (range 83% to 99%), respectively, and the overall diagnostic accuracy is 92% (range 66% to 98%).
The Coronary Assessment by Computed Tomography Scanning and Catheter Angiography (CATSCAN) study examined the diagnostic accuracy of multidetector CT in coronary artery segments larger than 2.0 mm in diameter. The 11 participating sites recruited 238 patients between the ages of 30 and 70 years, who were referred for clinically indicated nonemergency coronary angiography for evaluation of chest pain and for intermediate or high probability of disease. Of these patients, only those with Agatston calcium score <600 on a noncontrast calcium score scan went on to have CTA (n=187). Importantly, separate analyses were performed, first including then excluding segments with a reference diameter of 2 mm or larger that were found to be unevaluable. Because disease could not be excluded in the absence of evaluation, it was assumed that "this finding would also lead to conventional angiography in clinical practice." On the basis of this approach, the authors reported PPVs that were markedly reduced compared with those previously reported (50% stenosis criteria: 13% [per segment], 50% [per patient]; 70% stenosis criteria: 6% [per segment], 28% [per patient]). The primary results of that study suggest that 16-slice CTA is limited by the large number of false-positive studies related to unevaluable segments (38%).
The available evidence suggests that the ability of CTA to accurately assess the degree of luminal narrowing (a surrogate of physiological significance) is only modest. Recent studies with 64-slice CT indicate that quantitative estimates of stenosis severity by CTA correlate only modestly with quantitative coronary angiography (Figure 2), the former explaining only a small proportion of the variability in the latter.11,18,23 The limited accuracy for defining stenosis severity (a surrogate of physiological significance) by CTA can be explained by its limited spatial and temporal resolution compared with conventional coronary angiography, which leads to image degradation by motion and calcium. The bright (blooming) signal from high-density objects such as calcified coronary plaques extends beyond their true size in neighboring volume voxels, thereby leading to overestimation of stenosis severity.10,17 In addition, photon flux through such high-density areas occasionally leads to a signal void adjacent to calcified plaques that can be interpreted as "noncalcified" plaque, which could further overestimate plaque burden in individual patients. Although improvements in spatial resolution would decrease the impact of high-density objects, with current detector technology, this would significantly increase radiation exposure to maintain noise at a constant level.
|
In addition, growing and consistent evidence suggests that anatomy-based predictions of physiological significance by CTA differ substantially from direct measures of inducible myocardial ischemia, as assessed by myocardial perfusion imaging26–29 (Figure 3). Given the evidence above, it is clear that CTA has superior performance for excluding obstructive CAD (ie, consistently high NPV) versus for predicting who has obstructive disease and needs to be referred for coronary angiography for possible revascularization.
|
Evaluation of Coronary Artery Stents
Owing to the artifacts caused by metal, visualization of the coronary lumen within stents by CTA is more challenging than evaluation of the native coronary arteries (Figure 4). To date, a limited number of studies assessing the value of CTA to detect in-stent restenosis have been published30–35; however, they all show a consistently low sensitivity to identify in-stent restenosis. The limited spatial resolution of CT,36,37 the type of stent,36,37 and, especially, stent diameter (<3 mm being associated with the highest number of partial lumen visualization and nondiagnostic scans) contribute to limited clinical results.
|
Evaluation of Bypass Grafts
Assessing patency and progression of CAD in bypass grafts is less challenging than in the native coronary arteries because they are generally larger and less subject to motion (Figure 4). Occasionally, evaluation of internal mammary grafts can be difficult owing to blooming artifact from metal clips. On a per-graft basis, the average sensitivity for detecting at least 1 graft with >50% stenosis or total occlusion is 99% (range 96% to 100%), whereas the average specificity is 93% (range 68% to 100%). The corresponding average PPV and NPV are 83% (range 37% to 98%) and 99% (range 98% to 100%), respectively, and the overall diagnostic accuracy is 97% (range 95% to 99%).38–45 Importantly, no appreciable difference exists in the reported diagnostic accuracies for the detection of stenosis or total occlusions between arterial and vein grafts. In general, false-positive findings are related to difficulties in evaluating distal anastomosis.44 Despite the high degree of accuracy to detect occlusions and stenosis within grafts, CTA has limited value in the evaluation of the patient with recurrent chest pain after coronary artery bypass grafting, because this also requires an assessment of the native coronary arteries, which tend to be more challenging because they are usually very small and heavily calcified.
Assessing Coronary Plaque Burden
Cardiac CT can provide objective estimates of calcified and noncalcified atherosclerosis burden. The measurement of coronary artery calcification (CAC) has been widely used and reported as a means of atherosclerosis testing in at-risk patients. The presence and amount of calcium, as measured in Hounsfield units (HU), has been shown to be strongly associated with the amount of atherosclerotic plaque present in autopsy studies.46,47 The clinical value and application of CAC with both electron-beam CT and multidetector CT, however, have been very controversial. Although determination of CAC may be used to estimate the likelihood of significant stenoses, this approach is limited by a poor specificity (52%) despite its high sensitivity (91%).48 Many believe, however, that the NPV and low likelihood of CAD associated with the absence of coronary calcium (CAC=zero) may be clinically relevant.46 Furthermore, CAC scoring has been shown to provide incremental value over conventional risk factors and biochemical markers for the prediction of both significant and nonsignificant luminal narrowing on angiography.49,50 More importantly, the risk of adverse cardiovascular events increases as a function of CAC in both asymptomatic individuals and symptomatic patients.51–55 The future role of CAC is likely to be in the stratification of asymptomatic patients found to be at intermediate risk after the application of clinical risk scores.56,57
It is important to appreciate that a number of limitations to CAC exist. For example, the association between the site of calcification on calcium scoring and the actual location of the stenosis is relatively poor. Hence, the results of testing will not localize disease and will at best form an estimate of CAD likelihood. Furthermore, the prevalence of patients with atherosclerosis, and possibly significant coronary artery obstructions, on the basis of noncalcified plaque has not been studied thoroughly.58,59
The presence of significant coronary calcium, as measured by CAC, may also play an important role in identifying optimal candidates for CTA. Because the prevalence of CAC increases with age, particularly in males, the amount of calcium routinely encountered in older individuals can potentially compromise the ability to perform technically adequate CTA. For example, CAC in normal men aged 65 to 69, 70 to 74, and 75 years has been reported as 464±731, 665±921, and 836±1053 HU, respectively.60 Indeed, certain centers have adopted the policy of routine CAC before CTA to minimize uninterpretable CTA studies. Interestingly, at this time, 1 state Medicare authority has refused to reimburse CTA studies in patients with significant CAC levels. Alternatively, many centers go directly to CTA and do not perform CAC as a means of atherosclerosis testing because of the perceived superiority of CTA in this role.
Positron Emission Tomography
PET is a nuclear medicine technique that uses positron-emitting radionuclides to obtain images of myocardial perfusion and metabolism. Fortunately, atoms of high biological significance (eg, carbon, oxygen, and nitrogen) also have radionuclide species that decay by positron emission. Thus, the use of positron-emitting radionuclides allows unique quantitative information of important biological processes to be obtained in vivo (eg, myocardial perfusion, glucose metabolism, and fatty acid metabolism). The fundamental principle of positron tomography is that positron-emitting radionuclides (eg, carbon-11, nitrogen-13, oxygen-15, and fluorine-18) decay by emitting "positively" charged electrons (positrons). Once released from the nucleus, these positrons travel short distances in tissue and annihilate with the encounter of nearby electrons. This annihilation releases energy in the form of 2 gamma rays or photons that are emitted in opposite directions (180° from each other). These opposite high-energy photons (511 keV) are captured externally by an array of detector elements (scintillators) in the PET gantry. The electronics of the PET system are arranged to facilitate detection of 511-keV photons arriving at opposite detectors within a narrow temporal window and rejection of scattered photons arriving outside the preset temporal window, thereby enhancing the spatial and contrast resolution. Several technical advantages account for the improved image quality (Figure 5) and diagnostic ability of PET compared with SPECT, such as the following: (1) routine measured (depth-independent) attenuation correction, which decreases the number of false-positives and, thus, increases specificity; (2) high spatial and contrast resolution (heart-to-background ratio) that allows for improved detection of small perfusion defects, thereby decreasing the number of false-negatives and increasing sensitivity; (3) high temporal resolution that allows fast dynamic imaging of tracer kinetics, which makes absolute quantification of myocardial perfusion (in milliliters per minute per gram of tissue) possible. In addition, the use of short-lived radiopharmaceuticals allows fast, sequential assessment of regional myocardial perfusion (eg, rest and stress), thereby improving laboratory efficiency and patient throughput. Although these technical advantages have been recognized for a long time, the use of PET for routine detection of CAD has only gained clinical momentum in recent years. Recent Food and Drug Administration approval of PET agents for imaging myocardial perfusion (ie, 82Rb [generator product] and 13N-ammonia [cyclotron product]) and the subsequent changes in reimbursement are responsible for much of the recent growth in clinical cardiac PET. Despite these advantages, SPECT scanners and imaging radiotracers (eg, 99mTc agents and 201Tl) are still more widely available and less expensive than PET scanners and positron-emitting radiotracers (eg, 82Rb, 13N-ammonia).
|
Table 2 summarizes the published studies61–69 documenting the diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion PET imaging for detecting obstructive CAD. The average weighted sensitivity for detecting at least 1 coronary artery with >50% stenosis is 90% (range 83% to 100%), whereas the average specificity is 89% (range 73% to 100%). The corresponding average PPV and NPV are 94% (range 80% to 100%) and 73% (range 36% to 100%), respectively, and the overall diagnostic accuracy is 90% (range 84% to 98%).
|
Comparative Studies of PET Versus SPECT
Three studies have performed a direct comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 82Rb myocardial perfusion PET and 201Tl or 99mTc SPECT imaging in the same or matched patient populations. Go and colleagues66 compared PET and SPECT in 202 patients. Their results showed a higher sensitivity with PET than with SPECT (93% versus 76%, respectively), without significant changes in specificity (78% versus 80%, respectively). In another study, Stewart et al65 compared PET and SPECT in 81 patients. They observed a higher specificity for PET than with SPECT (83% versus 53%, respectively), without significant differences in sensitivity (86% versus 84%, respectively). Diagnostic accuracy was higher with PET than with SPECT (89% versus 78%, respectively).
More recently, Bateman et al62 compared 82Rb PET and 99mTc sestamibi SPECT in 2 matched patient cohorts undergoing clinically indicated pharmacological-stress perfusion imaging using contemporary technology for both SPECT and PET. Overall diagnostic accuracy with either a 50% (87% versus 71%) or a 70% (89% versus 79%, respectively) angiographic threshold was higher for PET than for SPECT. Differences in diagnostic accuracy reflected primarily the increased specificity (with a marginal advantage in sensitivity) of PET versus SPECT and applied to both men and women and to obese and nonobese individuals.
Diagnosing Multivessel CAD With Myocardial Perfusion PET
As depicted in Table 2, the relative assessment of myocardial perfusion with PET remains a sensitive means for diagnosing or ruling out the presence of obstructive CAD. As with SPECT, however, PET often uncovers only that territory supplied by the most severe stenosis. This is based on the fact that in patients with CAD, coronary vasodilator reserve is often abnormal even in territories supplied by noncritical angiographic stenoses,70,71 thereby reducing the heterogeneity of flow between "normal" and "abnormal" zones and limiting the ability to delineate the presence of multivessel CAD.
Alternatively, PET measurements of myocardial blood flow (in milliliters per minute per gram of myocardium) and coronary vasodilator reserve also help improve detection of multivessel CAD. The reports evaluating the diagnostic performance of myocardial perfusion PET to detect angiographic stenoses (Table 2) examined imaging results in terms of sensitivity and specificity rather than considering CAD as a continuous spectrum of severity. In patients with CAD, noninvasive measurements of coronary blood flow and vasodilator reserve by PET are inversely and nonlinearly related to stenosis severity, as defined by quantitative angiography.72–74 Importantly, coronary lesions of intermediate severity have a differential coronary flow reserve that can be detected by PET, which decreases as stenosis severity increases, thereby allowing better definition of the functional importance of known coronary epicardial stenosis.72–74
Two reports demonstrate the potential added clinical value of measures of coronary vasodilator reserve as assessed by PET to delineate the extent of underlying CAD. Yoshinaga et al71 compared the clinical value of measures of coronary vasodilator reserve as assessed by PET to relative assessments of myocardial perfusion by SPECT in 27 patients with CAD. They showed good agreement between SPECT defects and PET measures of vasodilator reserve in only 16 (28%) of 58 myocardial regions supplied by coronary stenosis >50% as assessed by quantitative angiography. The remaining 42 (72%) of 58 regions with angiographic stenoses showed no regional perfusion defects by SPECT but a definitely abnormal vasodilator reserve by PET. Similarly, Parkash et al75 recently reported on the value of quantification of coronary flow reserve versus the traditional relative assessment of myocardial perfusion to delineate the extent of CAD in a relatively small group of 23 patients. In patients with 3-vessel CAD, they found that defect sizes were significantly larger with quantification methods than with the traditional method (44±18% versus 69±24%). In patients with single-vessel CAD, defect sizes were smaller by quantification methods than with the traditional method (10±12% versus 18±17%). Thus, this is clearly an area of great clinical interest, and future studies are warranted to evaluate the added value of quantitative flow measurements for the noninvasive diagnosis of CAD.
Another potential advantage of PET is its distinct ability to assess LV function at rest and during peak stress (as opposed to poststress with gated SPECT). Recent data from our laboratory suggest that in normal subjects, LV ejection fraction (LVEF) increases during peak vasodilator stress76 (Figure 6). In patients with CAD, however, changes in LVEF (from baseline to peak stress) are inversely related to the magnitude of perfusion abnormalities during stress (reflecting ischemic myocardium). Indeed, patients with multivessel disease or left main disease show a frank drop in LVEF during peak stress even in the absence of apparent perfusion defects (Figure 6). In contrast, patients without significant CAD or with 1-vessel disease show a normal increase in LVEF. Consequently, the NPV of a delta increase in LVEF (from rest to peak stress) of 5% to exclude 3-vessel and/or left main CAD is 97%.76
|
PET and Stratification of Risk
To date, very limited data exist on the prognostic implications of stress PET results and the added value of stress PET over pre–myocardial perfusion imaging data for the identification of patients at risk for adverse cardiovascular events. The prognostic value of dipyridamole stress 82Rb PET was recently investigated in 367 patients followed up for 3.1±0.9 years.77 As has been described previously with SPECT, an increase in the extent and severity of perfusion defects with stress PET was associated with an increasing frequency of adverse events. Importantly, the hard event rate in patients with normal stress PET was 0.4% per year; however, this study, the largest PET prognosis study to date, was limited by the occurrence of only 17 hard events. Given the increased availability and use of stress PET, more and larger studies validating the prognostic value of stress PET will be available in the near future.
PET Measurements of Myocardial Perfusion to Monitor Progression and Regression of CAD
Lipid-lowering trials in patients with coronary atherosclerosis have demonstrated no progression or only modest regression of anatomic coronary artery stenoses compared with control patients.78–81 Despite the lack or modest regression in coronary artery stenoses, these studies have reported a proportionately greater decrease in coronary events in treated than in control patients.78–82 This has led to the hypothesis that stabilization of atherosclerotic plaques, reduction of inducible myocardial ischemia (caused by an improvement in coronary vasodilator function), or both effects combined may be more closely related to improved clinical outcomes than the simple anatomic change in plaque burden. This is based on the fact that myocardial blood flow is a function of the arterial radius raised to the fourth power. Consequently, small changes in diameter not measurable by anatomic imaging are magnified into much larger changes in blood flow that are readily seen and quantifiable by perfusion imaging. For diffuse coronary atherosclerosis, a mild anatomic reduction in diameter that may be difficult to detect by invasive coronary angiography or CTA (due to limitations in spatial resolution) will cause cumulatively increasing resistance along the length of the coronary artery.83 This cumulative resistance from base to apex84 causes a longitudinal perfusion gradient that can be identified by stress PET perfusion imaging.85–87 As with SPECT, several studies have also demonstrated the value of PET perfusion imaging to follow up changes in CAD,88 which can show rapid improvement in perfusion abnormalities after intense medical treatment is initiated. These changes are proportionately greater than those demonstrated by quantitative coronary angiography.81,89
Integrated Evaluation of Coronary Anatomy and Myocardial Perfusion With Hybrid PET/CT
The availability of hybrid PET/CT scanners that allow a true integration (fusion) of structure and function has interesting potential in cardiology (Figure 7). This technology enables detection and quantification of the burden of the extent of calcified and noncalcified plaques, quantification of vascular reactivity and endothelial health, identification of flow-limiting coronary stenoses, and potentially identification of high-risk plaques (through fusion of anatomy and biology with molecularly targeted PET imaging) in the coronary and other arterial beds in the same setting. Together, by revealing the degree and location of anatomic stenoses and their physiological significance and the plaque burden and its composition, integrated PET/CT can provide unique information that may improve noninvasive diagnosis of CAD and the prediction of cardiovascular risk.
|
Assessing Atherosclerosis Burden
Integrated PET/CT offers an opportunity to assess the presence and magnitude of subclinical atherosclerotic disease burden and to measure myocardial blood flow (in milliliters per minute per gram of myocardium) as a marker of endothelial health and atherosclerotic disease activity. Recent evidence comparing the results of cardiac CT and myocardial perfusion imaging suggest that a significant proportion of patients with normal myocardial perfusion studies have evidence of subclinical atherosclerosis (sometimes extensive) by CTA. This finding is not unexpected, because the myocardial perfusion imaging method is designed for and targets the identification of flow-limiting stenoses. Although it is premature to predict the clinical significance of this observation, it provides intriguing evidence for future investigations of the potential complementary role of CTA and perfusion imaging for individualizing risk stratification and patient management. Although myocardial perfusion imaging will likely continue to define the need for revascularization, the objective assessment of atherosclerotic burden (both calcified and noncalcified plaques) by CTA might be able to play a role in individualizing the intensity and goals of medical therapy.
Potential for Plaque Characterization
PET/CT also offers an opportunity for direct molecularly targeted imaging of atherosclerotic disease activity. The detailed anatomic information about vascular disease provided by contrast-enhanced CT can be complemented by the molecular insights of positron tomography. In a pilot study of symptomatic patients with carotid atherosclerosis, Rudd and colleagues90 demonstrated a relationship between anatomic plaque by CTA, glucose uptake by PET (reflecting inflammation), and patients’ symptoms. The net 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) accumulation rate in symptomatic lesions was 27% higher than in contralateral asymptomatic lesions (Figure 8). No measurable glucose uptake existed in normal carotid arteries. Autoradiography of excised plaques confirmed accumulation of FDG in macrophage-rich areas of the plaque. Similar findings have also been reported in experimental studies of atherosclerosis.91,92 This suggests that the phenotyping potential of hybrid PET/CT could provide mechanistic insights into atherothrombotic processes, better risk stratification, optimal selection of therapeutic targets, more individualized treatment, and the means for monitoring therapeutic responses.
|
Guiding Management of CAD
Because not all coronary stenoses detected by CTA are flow-limiting, the stress myocardial perfusion PET data complement the CT anatomic information by providing instant readings about the clinical significance (ie, ischemic burden) of such stenoses (Figures 9 and 10
). As described above, recent data from multiple laboratories using either sequential imaging (CTA followed by SPECT)27,29 or hybrid imaging (SPECT/CT or PET/CT)26,28 suggest that the PPV of CTA for identifying coronary stenoses that produce objective evidence of stress-induced ischemia is suboptimal (Figure 3). This is consistent with the well-described limitations of anatomic measures of CAD for delineating the physiological implications of stenoses.93 First, percent diameter stenosis is only a modest descriptor of coronary resistance because it does not incorporate other lesion characteristics (eg, length, shape, and eccentricity) or stenoses in series that may greatly affect the impedance to blood flow. Second, vasomotor tone and coronary collateral flow, both of which are known to affect myocardial perfusion, are not assessed by simple measures of stenosis severity. Finally, as described above, CTA is limited in its ability to accurately define the severity of stenosis (a surrogate of physiological significance; Figure 2). In contrast, myocardial perfusion imaging provides a simple and accurate integrated measure of the effect of all these parameters on coronary resistance and tissue perfusion, thereby optimizing the selection of patients who may ultimately benefit from revascularization. This finding, if confirmed in larger studies, would suggest that additional noninvasive testing would be required after CTA before consideration for invasive catheterization. Furthermore, the use of CTA alone in patients with atherosclerosis without myocardial perfusion imaging would potentially result in an enormous increase in costs of care and resource utilization due to unnecessary downstream catheterization and revascularization procedures.94 In addition, image fusion of the stress perfusion PET data with the coronary CT information can help identify the culprit stenosis in a patient presenting with chest pain and help guide targeted coronary interventions.
|
|
As is the case for CTA, insufficient data currently exist to guide the optimal, efficient use of hybrid imaging in the patient with known or suspected CAD. The complementary nature of stress PET and CTA make a hybrid approach appealing as a potential "one-stop shop" for CAD patients in that the reported data will include rest and peak stress LV perfusion, rest and peak stress LV size and function, coronary anatomy, and atherosclerosis assessment. In the near future, this is likely to also include plaque morphology, coronary reserve, and image fusion to assess culprit lesions. A pivotal question for future research is whether the hybrid approach is a cost-effective one or whether the CTA and PET data are better acquired in a staged approach, with 1 of the 2 tests serving as a screen for the other. Software will permit the same image fusion to be achieved whether the data were acquired on a hybrid system or 2 individual PET and CTA systems. It is feasible that depending on a patient’s pretest likelihood of CAD and underlying risk, a patient with a lower likelihood of CAD may be optimally imaged with a CTA-first approach, with patients with a higher likelihood of CAD being imaged with PET as the first approach or, in certain subsets, with a hybrid approach. We await ongoing studies to define these cohorts.
Areas of Uncertainty for CTA, PET, and Hybrid PET/CT
With respect to diagnostic accuracy, the CTA and PET series to date have relatively limited representation of important patient subgroups, namely, women, obese individuals, and people with diabetes mellitus (Tables 1 and 2
). These subgroups are relevant because they comprise a large segment of patients referred for testing for known or suspected CAD. With respect to CTA, extrapolation of the results presented in Table 1 to these patient subgroups is problematic because they pose potential challenges for this technology that are related to smaller coronary vessels (eg, women and diabetic patients) and large body mass, potentially resulting in limited image quality. For example, some studies have reported higher sensitivity for CAD detection for men than for women without changes in specificity.16,19 Although these apparent differences may be related to a higher prevalence of disease in men in these series with limited statistical power, the value of CTA for CAD diagnosis in women requires further study. With PET, diagnostic accuracy appears comparable in men and women.61,62 Likewise, the diagnostic accuracy of CTA in frankly obese individuals (body mass index >30 kg/m2) appears to be lower than among nonobese subjects,23 although this too requires further investigation. To date, no studies have been published evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of these approaches in patients with diabetes mellitus.
Finally, considerable further information will be needed to identify where CTA and PET or hybrid PET/CT will fit in a clinical strategy. In light of the poor PPV of CTA for predicting ischemia, its use as a gatekeeper to catheterization may result in considerable downstream overutilization of catheterization and, possibly, revascularization procedures. However, CTA may eventually develop 1 or more possible roles, which could include its use as an initial test of atherosclerosis in at-risk individuals and as a means of resolving equivocal or uncertain stress perfusion studies. It is currently premature to predict with certainty which of these may be validated owing to insufficient available data.
Many of these questions may be addressed by the Study of Perfusion versus Anatomy’s Role in CAD (SPARC) a prospective multicenter registry comparing stress SPECT, stress PET, PET/CTA, and CTA alone with respect to outcomes and resource utilization.95 This study, designed to enroll 3700 patients in 35 to 40 sites, will shed light on the relative value of these newer modalities (PET, CTA, and hybrid PET/CT) compared with standard approaches (SPECT). In particular, insights may be gained into questions such as which test or combination of tests should be used, sequentially or in combination, in which patients.
|
Evaluation of Myocardial Viability and Infarction |
|---|
|
TopIntroductionConceptual Framework of...Evaluation of Obstructive CADEvaluation of Myocardial...Technology TrendsSummaryReferences |
|---|
Cardiac CT
Much like contrast magnetic resonance (CMR), CT can also be used for assessing the extent of scar and tissue viability. Although the notion of using contrast-enhanced CT to assess viability is not new,96–101 recent advances in its temporal and spatial resolution with multidetector CT technology have renewed the clinical interest for this application.102–104
Recent studies in experimental models of ischemia/reperfusion have shown that iodinated contrast agents share many of the kinetic features seen with Gd-DTPA used in CMR studies. First-pass (referred to as early) images of iodinated contrast through the infarcted myocardium (especially acutely reperfused) frequently demonstrate the presence of so-called "cold spots" (ie, lack of contrast enhancement in an area surrounded by normal myocardial contrast opacification), which reflect impaired tissue perfusion that results from microvascular obstruction from distal embolization and surrounding tissue edema105 (Figure 11). However, a few minutes after contrast administration, accumulation of the contrast agent increases as a result of an increased volume of distribution in areas of myocyte necrosis, which results in so-called "bright spots" (or delayed hyperenhancement), reflecting areas of myocardial scarring. Experimental studies suggest that peak enhancement occurs approximately 5 to 10 minutes after contrast injection.102,103
|
Signal-to-noise ratio, which reflects image quality, between reperfused and normal myocardium is comparable to that of CMR in the early (first-pass) images but significantly lower than that obtained with CMR in the delayed images.102,106 However, quantitative estimates of infarct size with delayed CT imaging appear to be comparable to those achieved with CMR, both in experimental102,103,106 and clinical102,104 models of myocardial infarction. The results thus far show that similar to CMR, early CT images consistently underestimate the extent of myocardial scar, especially in areas of chronic myocardial injury,102,104 thereby necessitating a second scan (delayed images) to accurately measure infarction and viability. The need for a second (albeit low-dose) scan (after a CTA) obviously increases the radiation dose to the patient and thus makes it somewhat less attractive clinically than CMR for this application. However, the relative clinical utility of these approaches may depend on future research demonstrating head-to-head differences or similarities of these methods to predict functional recovery and survival in heart failure patients after revascularization.
Positron Emission Tomography
The use of metabolic imaging with PET for evaluating myocardial viability has been extensively validated. Although several approaches have been documented,107–109 the use of FDG to assess regional myocardial glucose utilization (an index of tissue viability) is the most common approach in clinical practice.110 With this approach, specific abnormalities in myocardial metabolism that reflect viable and scarred myocardium have been described (Figure 12). Contractile dysfunction is predicted to be reversible after revascularization in regions with increased FDG uptake or a perfusion-FDG mismatch and irreversible in those with reduced FDG uptake or a perfusion-FDG match pattern. With these criteria, the average PPV for predicting improved segmental function after revascularization is 76% (range 52% to 100%), whereas the average NPV is 82% (range 67% to 100%).110
|
Several studies using different PET approaches have shown that the gain in global LV systolic function after revascularization is related to the magnitude of viable myocardium assessed preoperatively.111 These data demonstrate that clinically meaningful changes in global LV function can be expected after revascularization only in patients with relatively large areas of hibernating and/or stunned myocardium (
20% of the LV mass). Similar results have been reported using estimates of myocardial scar with PET.112 The inverse relationship between the extent of scar assessed by FDG PET and the changes in LVEF after revascularization are consistent with those obtained with SPECT,113 dobutamine echocardiography,114 and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.115 In keeping with the observed changes in LV function after revascularization, the magnitude of improvement in heart failure symptoms also correlates with the preoperative extent of viable myocardium.116 Furthermore, the observed improvement in symptom status in patients with viability by PET also appears to correlate with the reduced frequency of hospital readmission for decompensated heart failure after revascularization.117 The notion that noninvasive imaging of viability can predict the degree of symptomatic improvement in heart failure patients has been confirmed in studies involving PET118 and SPECT imaging of 201Tl or 99mTc sestamibi,119 as well as identification of contractile reserve by dobutamine echocardiography.120 Taken together, these data suggest that the extent of dysfunctional ischemic viable myocardium in heart failure patients can be used as a potential marker of the symptomatic benefit that will accrue as a result of revascularization.
An issue of even greater clinical relevance is whether viability imaging may help identify patients with low ejection fraction for whom revascularization may offer a survival advantage. Early PET reports showed that patients with viable myocardium treated medically had a consistently higher event rate than those without viability.110 These data also suggested that the poor event-free survival of patients with viable myocardium undergoing medical therapy was improved significantly and consistently by early referral to revascularization.110 These initial findings with FDG PET have been confirmed by virtually all subsequent studies using noninvasive imaging with either nuclear testing or echocardiography.121,122 Together, these findings imply that despite an increasing clinical risk of revascularization with worsening LV dysfunction, noninvasive imaging evidence of preserved viability may provide information on clinical benefit to balance against that risk, which could help inform clinical decision making.
|
Technology Trends |
|---|
|
TopIntroductionConceptual Framework of...Evaluation of Obstructive CADEvaluation of Myocardial...Technology TrendsSummaryReferences |
|---|
Innovations in imaging technology, especially for CT and hybrid PET/CT and SPECT/CT, are occurring rapidly, and significant improvements are expected within the next 2 to 5 years. In CT, technology is rapidly evolving with regard to several important specifications. With respect to temporal resolution, the gradual improvement seen with newer-generation scanners is expected to improve further by the introduction of dual x-ray source CT technology.123 Temporal resolution is particularly important in imaging the beating heart, especially for good-quality imaging of the coronary arteries after intravenous contrast administration. With respect to axial coverage, it appears inevitable that multislice CT will continue to evolve in this way (128 and 256 multidetector CT scanners are announced or already in early testing) until coverage becomes sufficient to eliminate the need for couch translation during cardiac imaging. This is expected to improve image quality by minimizing artifacts caused by cardiac and/or breathing motion. It may also facilitate dynamic imaging for the evaluation of myocardial perfusion and may possibly help to reduce radiation exposure. One other important specification is spatial resolution, which is not expected to improve significantly by the advancements in volume CT. This limits accurate assessments of stenosis severity and possibly the reproducibility of quantitative evaluation of plaque burden. Area detectors, such as flat-panel technology, have the potential to produce significant improvements in spatial resolution; however, this technology does not yet provide the low-noise characteristics of the scintillator arrays used in multislice CT. Technology advances are also focused at limiting the radiation dose to patients. The routine implementation of ECG-dependent dose modulation (whereby the intensity of the x-ray dose is significantly reduced during end systole); potential implementation of "step-and-shoot" protocols in which the entire heart volume is collected over a series of sequential, contiguous stops (as opposed to a helical acquisition), thereby enabling the x-ray beam to be turned on only during data acquisition; and the expected reductions in scanning time with increased axial coverage and possible prospective gating should all help reduce radiation exposure.
PET has already evolved (likely irreversibly) into hybrid PET/CT imaging. Advances in both PET and CT technology are also being rapidly incorporated into hybrid scanners, to improve both sensitivity and spatial resolution. These specifications are crucial as the field rapidly evolves to in vivo imaging of small quantities of molecularly targeted agents. Changes in radiotracer technology are also expected to expand the clinical use of cardiac PET/CT. For example, introduction of 18F-based PET imaging agents will potentially reduce cost because it would enable unit-dose distribution of radiopharmaceuticals, similar to oncology PET/CT applications.
|
Summary |
|---|
|
TopIntroductionConceptual Framework of...Evaluation of Obstructive CADEvaluation of Myocardial...Technology TrendsSummaryReferences |
|---|
Innovations in noninvasive cardiovascular imaging are rapidly advancing our ability to image in great detail the structure and function of the heart and vasculature. Cardiac CT and hybrid PET/CT are clear examples of this innovation. Multidetector cardiac CT now allows rapid, detailed imaging of the coronary arteries and other vascular beds, with quantitative assessments of plaque burden and morphology. By providing concurrent quantitative information about myocardial blood flow and metabolism with coronary and cardiac anatomy, PET/CT offers the opportunity for a comprehensive noninvasive evaluation of the consequences of atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries and myocardium. This integrated platform for assessing anatomy and biology offers great potential for translating advances in molecularly targeted imaging into humans. The goals of future investigation will be to refine these technologies, establish standard protocols for image acquisition and interpretation, address the issue of cost-effectiveness, and validate a range of clinical applications in large-scale clinical trials.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We are indebted to Jeselle Gierbolini for her secretarial assistance and to Dr Sharmila Dorbala for her expert assistance in preparing some of the illustrations for this manuscript.
Disclosures
Dr Di Carli reports receiving lecture fees, serving on advisory boards, and/or grant support from GE Healthcare, Siemens Medical Solutions, Bracco Diagnostics, Astellas, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Imaging. Dr Hachamovitch reports receiving lecture fees, serving on advisory boards, and/or grant support from GE Healthcare, Siemens Medical Solutions, Bracco Diagnostics, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb Imaging, and Eastern Isotopes.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
The online-only Data Supplement, consisting of movies, is available with this article at http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/115/11/1464/DC1.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopIntroductionConceptual Framework of...Evaluation of Obstructive CADEvaluation of Myocardial...Technology TrendsSummaryReferences |
|---|
1. Weiner DA, Ryan TJ, McCabe CH, Chaitman BR, Sheffield LT, Fisher LD, Tristani F. The role of exercise testing in identifying patients with improved survival after coronary artery bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1986; 8: 741–748.[Abstract]
2. Weiner DA, Ryan TJ, McCabe CH, Chaitman BR, Sheffield LT, Fisher LD, Tristani F. Value of exercise testing in determining the risk classification and the response to coronary artery bypass grafting in three-vessel coronary artery disease: a report from the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry. Am J Cardiol. 1987; 60: 262–266.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS. Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation. 2003; 107: 2900–2907.
4. Califf RM, Phillips HR III, Hindman MC, Mark DB, Lee KL, Behar VS, Johnson RA, Pryor DB, Rosati RA, Wagner GS, Harrell FE. Prognostic value of a coronary artery jeopardy score. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985; 5: 1055–1063.[Abstract]
5. Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PM, de Feyter PJ. Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation. 2002; 106: 2051–2054.
6. Ropers D, Baum U, Pohle K, Anders K, Ulzheimer S, Ohnesorge B, Schlundt C, Bautz W, Daniel WG, Achenbach S. Detection of coronary artery stenoses with thin-slice multi-detector row spiral computed tomography and multiplanar reconstruction. Circulation. 2003; 107: 664–666.
7. Kuettner A, Trabold T, Schroeder S, Feyer A, Beck T, Brueckner A, Heuschmid M, Burgstahler C, Kopp AF, Claussen CD. Noninvasive detection of coronary lesions using 16-detector multislice spiral computed tomography technology: initial clinical results. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44: 1230–1237.
8. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Nieman K, Saia F, Lemos PA, McFadden EP, Pattynama PM, Serruys PW, Krestin GP, de Feyter PJ. Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 43: 2265–2270.
9. Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D’Eliseo A, Razzini C, Tomassini M, Sperandio M, Simonetti G, Romeo F. Accuracy of thin-slice computed tomography in the detection of coronary stenoses. Eur Heart J. 2004; 25: 1043–1048.
10. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Cury RC, Ferencik M, Jang IK, Diaz LJ, Abbara S, Brady TJ, Achenbach S. 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: 2638–2643.
11. Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Schmitz BL, Schmid FT, Lieberknecht M, Schulze R, Ludwig B, Kroschel U, Jahnke N, Haerer W, Brambs HJ, Aschoff AJ. Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography. JAMA. 2005; 293: 2471–2478.
12. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Nieman K, Saia F, Lemos PA, McFadden EP, Serruys PW, Krestin GP, de Feyter PJ. Noninvasive assessment of coronary plaque burden using multislice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol. 2005; 95: 1165–1169.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
13. Kefer J, Coche E, Legros G, Pasquet A, Grandin C, Van Beers BE, Vanoverschelde JL, Gerber BL. 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.
14. Kaiser C, Bremerich J, Haller S, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Bongartz G, Pfisterer M, Buser P. Limited diagnostic yield of non-invasive coronary angiography by 16-slice multi-detector spiral computed tomography in routine patients referred for evaluation of coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26: 1987–1992.
15. Kuettner A, Beck T, Drosch T, Kettering K, Heuschmid M, Burgstahler C, Claussen CD, Kopp AF, Schroeder S. Image quality and diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive coronary imaging with 16 detector slice spiral computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. Heart. 2005; 91: 938–941.
16. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Pohle FK, Raaz D, von Erffa J, Yilmaz A, Muschiol G, Daniel WG. Detection of coronary artery stenoses using multi-detector CT with 16 x 0.75 collimation and 375 ms rotation. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26: 1978–1986.
17. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA, Runza G, McFadden EP, Baks T, Serruys PW, Krestin GP, de Feyter PJ. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation. 2005; 112: 2318–2323.
18. Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, Becker A, Nikolaou K, Paul S, Wintersperger B, Reiser M, Becker CR, Steinbeck G, Boekstegers P. 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: 147–154.
19. Kuettner A, Beck T, Drosch T, Kettering K, Heuschmid M, Burgstahler C, Claussen CD, Kopp AF, Schroeder S. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary imaging using 16-detector slice spiral computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 45: 123–127.
20. Garcia MJ, Lessick J, Hoffmann MH. Accuracy of 16-row multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis. JAMA. 2006; 296: 403–411.
21. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Krestin GP, McFadden EP, Arampatzis CA, Serruys PW, de Feyter PJ. Improved diagnostic accuracy with 16-row multi-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 45: 128–132.
22. Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, Desbiolles L, Grunenfelder J, Marincek B, Wildermuth S. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26: 1482–1487.
23. 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: 552–557.
24. Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Runza G, van Mieghem C, Meijboom WB, Malagutti P, Baks T, Krestin GP, deFeyter PJ, Cademartiri F. Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Radiol. 2006; 16: 575–582.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
25. Ropers D, Rixe J, Anders K, Kuttner A, Baum U, Bautz W, Daniel WG, Achenbach S. Usefulness of multidetector row spiral computed tomography with 64- x 0.6-mm collimation and 330-ms rotation for the noninvasive detection of significant coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol. 2006; 97: 343–348.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
26. Di Carli MF, Dorbala S, Limaye A, Sampson UK, Kwong R, Schenker M, Rybicki F, Lipton M, Goldhaber SZ, Hachamovitch R. Clinical value of hybrid PET/CT cardiac imaging: complementary roles of multi-detector CT coronary angiography and stress PET perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 47: 115A. Abstract.
27. Hacker M, Jakobs T, Matthiesen F, Vollmar C, Nikolaou K, Becker C, Knez A, Pfluger T, Reiser M, Hahn K, Tiling R. Comparison of spiral multidetector CT angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging in the noninvasive detection of functionally relevant coronary artery lesions: first clinical experiences. J Nucl Med. 2005; 46: 1294–1300.
28. Rispler S, Roguin A, Keidar Z, Ghersin E, Aronson D, Dragu R, Engel A, Israel O, Beyar R. Integrated SPECT/CT for the assessment of hemodynamically significant coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 47: 115A. Abstract.
29. 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. Relationship between noninvasive coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 48: 2508–2514.
30. Cademartiri F, Mollet N, Lemos PA, Pugliese F, Baks T, McFadden EP, Krestin GP, de Feyter PJ. Usefulness of multislice computed tomographic coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol. 2005; 96: 799–802.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
31. Gaspar T, Halon DA, Lewis BS, Adawi S, Schliamser JE, Rubinshtein R, Flugelman MY, Peled N. Diagnosis of coronary in-stent restenosis with multidetector row spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 46: 1573–1579.
32. Gilard M, Cornily JC, Pennec PY, Le Gal G, Nonent M, Mansourati J, Blanc JJ, Boschat J. Assessment of coronary artery stents by 16 slice computed tomography. Heart. 2006; 92: 58–61.
33. Gilard M, Cornily JC, Rioufol G, Finet G, Pennec PY, Mansourati J, Blanc JJ, Boschat J. Noninvasive assessment of left main coronary stent patency with 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol. 2005; 95: 110–112.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
34. Kitagawa T, Fujii T, Tomohiro Y, Maeda K, Kobayashi M, Kunita E, Sekiguchi Y. Noninvasive assessment of coronary stents in patients by 16-slice computed tomography. Int J Cardiol. 2006; 109: 188–194.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
35. Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Warda HM, Vliegen HW, de Roos A, van der Wall EE. Feasibility of assessment of coronary stent patency using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol. 2004; 94: 427–430.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
36. Mahnken AH, Muhlenbruch G, Seyfarth T, Flohr T, Stanzel S, Wildberger JE, Gunther RW, Kuettner A. 64-slice computed tomography assessment of coronary artery stents: a phantom study. Acta Radiol. 2006; 47: 36–42.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
37. Maintz D, Seifarth H, Raupach R, Flohr T, Rink M, Sommer T, Ozgun M, Heindel W, Fischbach R. 64-Slice multidetector coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 68 different stents. Eur Radiol. 2006; 16: 818–826.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
38. Anders K, Baum U, Schmid M, Ropers D, Schmid A, Pohle K, Daniel WG, Bautz W, Achenbach S. 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: 336–344.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
39. Chiurlia E, Menozzi M, Ratti C, Romagnoli R, Modena MG. Follow-up of coronary artery bypass graft patency by multislice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol. 2005; 95: 1094–1097.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
40. Malagutti P, Nieman K, Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CA, Pugliese F, Cademartiri F, Mollet NR, Boersma E, de Jaegere PP, de Feyter PJ. Use of 64-slice CT in symptomatic patients after coronary bypass surgery: evaluation of grafts and coronary arteries. Eur Heart J. 2006 July 17 [E-pub ahead of print].
41. Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D’Eliseo A, Tomassini M, Razzini C, Sperandio M, Simonetti G, Romeo F, Mehta JL. Evaluation of venous and arterial conduit patency by 16-slice spiral computed tomography. Circulation. 2004; 110: 3234–3238.
42. Pache G, Saueressig U, Frydrychowicz A, Foell D, Ghanem N, Kotter E, Geibel-Zehender A, Bode C, Langer M, Bley T. Initial experience with 64-slice cardiac CT: non-invasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27: 976–980.
43. Salm LP, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Schuijf JD, Vliegen HW, Lamb HJ, van der Wall EE, de Roos A. Comprehensive assessment of patients after coronary artery bypass grafting by 16-detector-row computed tomography. Am Heart J. 2005; 150: 775–781.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
44. 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: 1224–1229.
45. Burgstahler C, Beck T, Kuettner A, Drosch T, Kopp AF, Heuschmid M, Claussen CD, Schroeder S. 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: 244–249.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
46. O’Rourke RA, Brundage BH, Froelicher VF, Greenland P, Grundy SM, Hachamovitch R, Pohost GM, Shaw LJ, Weintraub WS, Winters WL Jr. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association expert consensus document on electron-beam computed tomography for the diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000; 36: 326–340.
47. Sangiorgi G, Rumberger JA, Severson A, Edwards WD, Gregoire J, Fitzpatrick LA, Schwartz RS. Arterial calcification and not lumen stenosis is highly correlated with atherosclerotic plaque burden in humans: a histologic study of 723 coronary artery segments using nondecalcifying methodology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998; 31: 126–133.
48. Nallamothu BK, Saint S, Bielak LF, Sonnad SS, Peyser PA, Rubenfire M, Fendrick AM. Electron-beam computed tomography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med. 2001; 161: 833–838.
49. Brown BG, Morse J, Zhao XQ, Cheung M, Marino E, Albers JJ. Electron-beam tomography coronary calcium scores are superior to Framingham risk variables for predicting the measured proximal stenosis burden. Am J Cardiol. 2001; 88: 23E–26E.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
50. Lamont DH, Budoff MJ, Shavelle DM, Shavelle R, Brundage BH, Hagar JM. Coronary calcium scanning adds incremental value to patients with positive stress tests. Am Heart J. 2002; 143: 861–867.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
51. Greenland P, LaBree L, Azen SP, Doherty TM, Detrano RC. Coronary artery calcium score combined with Framingham score for risk prediction in asymptomatic individuals. JAMA. 2004; 291: 210–215.
52. Keelan PC, Bielak LF, Ashai K, Jamjoum LS, Denktas AE, Rumberger JA, Sheedy IP, Peyser PA, Schwartz RS. Long-term prognostic value of coronary calcification detected by electron-beam computed tomography in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Circulation. 2001; 104: 412–417.
53. Kondos GT, Hoff JA, Sevrukov A, Daviglus ML, Garside DB, Devries SS, Chomka EV, Liu K. Electron-beam tomography coronary artery calcium and cardiac events: a 37-month follow-up of 5635 initially asymptomatic low- to intermediate-risk adults. Circulation. 2003; 107: 2571–2576.
54. O’Malley PG, Taylor AJ, Jackson JL, Doherty TM, Detrano RC. Prognostic value of coronary electron-beam computed tomography for coronary heart disease events in asymptomatic populations. Am J Cardiol. 2000; 85: 945–948.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
55. Wayhs R, Zelinger A, Raggi P. High coronary artery calcium scores pose an extremely elevated risk for hard events. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002; 39: 225–230.
56. Arad Y, Goodman KJ, Roth M, Newstein D, Guerci AD. Coronary calcification, coronary disease risk factors, C-reactive protein, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events: the St. Francis Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 46: 158–165.
57. Greenland P, Gaziano JM. Clinical practice. Selecting asymptomatic patients for coronary computed tomography or electrocardiographic exercise testing. N Engl J Med. 2003; 349: 465–473.
58. Knez A, Becker A, Leber A, White C, Becker CR, Reiser MF, Steinbeck G, Boekstegers P. Relation of coronary calcium scores by electron beam tomography to obstructive disease in 2,115 symptomatic patients. Am J Cardiol. 2004; 93: 1150–1152.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
59. Stary HC. The development of calcium deposits in atherosclerotic lesions and their persistence after lipid regression. Am J Cardiol. 2001; 88: 16E–19E.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
60. Hoff JA, Chomka EV, Krainik AJ, Daviglus M, Rich S, Kondos GT. Age and gender distributions of coronary artery calcium detected by electron beam tomography in 35,246 adults. Am J Cardiol. 2001; 87: 1335–1339.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
61. Sampson UK, Limaye A, Dorbala S, Crugnale S, Yang D, Kwong R, Di Carli MF. Diagnostic accuracy of rubidium-82 myocardial perfusion imaging with hybrid positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET-CT) in the detection of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. In press.
62. Bateman TM, Heller GV, McGhie AI, Friedman JD, Case JA, Bryngelson JR, Hertenstein GK, Moutray KL, Reid K, Cullom SJ. Diagnostic accuracy of rest/stress ECG-gated Rb-82 myocardial perfusion PET: comparison with ECG-gated Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006; 13: 24–33.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
63. Marwick TH, Nemec JJ, Stewart WJ, Salcedo EE. Diagnosis of coronary artery disease using exercise echocardiography and positron emission tomography: comparison and analysis of discrepant results. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 1992; 5: 231–238.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
64. Grover-McKay M, Ratib O, Schwaiger M, Wohlgelernter D, Araujo L, Nienaber C, Phelps M, Schelbert HR. Detection of coronary artery disease with positron emission tomography and rubidium 82. Am Heart J. 1992; 123: 646–652.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
65. Stewart RE, Schwaiger M, Molina E, Popma J, Gacioch GM, Kalus M, Squicciarini S, al-Aouar ZR, Schork A, Kuhl DE. Comparison of rubidium-82 positron emission tomography and thallium-201 SPECT imaging for detection of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1991; 67: 1303–1310.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
66. Go RT, Marwick TH, MacIntyre WJ, Saha GB, Neumann DR, Underwood DA, Simpfendorfer CC. A prospective comparison of rubidium-82 PET and thallium-201 SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging utilizing a single dipyridamole stress in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med. 1990; 31: 1899–1905.
67. Demer LL, Gould KL, Goldstein RA, Kirkeeide RL, Mullani NA, Smalling RW, Nishikawa A, Merhige ME. Assessment of coronary artery disease severity by positron emission tomography: comparison with quantitative arteriography in 193 patients. Circulation. 1989; 79: 825–835.
68. Tamaki N, Yonekura Y, Senda M, Yamashita K, Koide H, Saji H, Hashimoto T, Fudo T, Kambara H, Kawai C, Konishi J. Value and limitation of stress thallium-201 single photon emission computed tomography: comparison with nitrogen-13 ammonia positron tomography. J Nucl Med. 1988; 29: 1181–1188.
69. Gould KL, Goldstein RA, Mullani NA, Kirkeeide RL, Wong WH, Tewson TJ, Berridge MS, Bolomey LA, Hartz RK, Smalling RW, Fuentes F, Nishikawa A. Noninvasive assessment of coronary stenoses by myocardial perfusion imaging during pharmacologic coronary vasodilation, VIII: clinical feasibility of positron cardiac imaging without a cyclotron using generator-produced rubidium-82. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1986; 7: 775–789.[Abstract]
70. Uren NG, Crake T, Lefroy DC, de Silva R, Davies GJ, Maseri A. Reduced coronary vasodilator function in infarcted and normal myocardium after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1994; 331: 222–227.
71. Yoshinaga K, Katoh C, Noriyasu K, Iwado Y, Furuyama H, Ito Y, Kuge Y, Kohya T, Kitabatake A, Tamaki N. Reduction of coronary flow reserve in areas with and without ischemia on stress perfusion imaging in patients with coronary artery disease: a study using oxygen 15-labeled water PET. J Nucl Cardiol. 2003; 10: 275–283.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
72. Di Carli M, Czernin J, Hoh CK, Gerbaudo VH, Brunken RC, Huang SC, Phelps ME, Schelbert HR. Relation among stenosis severity, myocardial blood flow, and flow reserve in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation. 1995; 91: 1944–1951.
73. Uren NG, Melin JA, De Bruyne B, Wijns W, Baudhuin T, Camici PG. Relation between myocardial blood flow and the severity of coronary- artery stenosis. N Engl J Med. 1994; 330: 1782–1788.
74. Beanlands RS, Muzik O, Melon P, Sutor R, Sawada S, Muller D, Bondie D, Hutchins GD, Schwaiger M. Noninvasive quantification of regional myocardial flow reserve in patients with coronary atherosclerosis using nitrogen-13 ammonia positron emission tomography: determination of extent of altered vascular reactivity. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995; 26: 1465–1475.[Abstract]
75. Parkash R, deKemp RA, Ruddy TD, Kitsikis A, Hart R, Beauschene L, Williams K, Davies RA, Labinaz M, Beanlands RS. Potential utility of rubidium 82 PET quantification in patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004; 11: 440–449.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
76. Dorbala S, Vangala D, Sampson U, Limaye A, Kwong R, Di Carli MF. Value of left ventricular ejection fraction reserve in assessment of severe left main/three-vessel coronary artery disease: a Rubidium-82 PET-CT study. J Nucl Med. In press.
77. Yoshinaga K, Chow BJ, Williams K, Chen L, deKemp RA, Garrard L, Lok-Tin Szeto A, Aung M, Davies RA, Ruddy TD, Beanlands RS. What is the prognostic value of myocardial perfusion imaging using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 48: 1029–1039.
78. Ornish D, Brown SE, Scherwitz LW, Billings JH, Armstrong WT, Ports TA, McLanahan SM, Kirkeeide RL, Brand RJ, Gould KL. Can lifestyle changes reverse coronary heart disease? The Lifestyle Heart Trial. Lancet. 1990; 336: 129–133.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
79. Brown G, Albers JJ, Fisher LD, Schaefer SM, Lin JT, Kaplan C, Zhao XQ, Bisson BD, Fitzpatrick VF, Dodge HT. Regression of coronary artery disease as a result of intensive lipid-lowering therapy in men with high levels of apolipoprotein B. N Engl J Med. 1990; 323: 1289–1298.[Abstract]
80. Kane JP, Malloy MJ, Ports TA, Phillips NR, Diehl JC, Havel RJ. Regression of coronary atherosclerosis during treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia with combined drug regimens. JAMA. 1990; 264: 3007–3012.
81. Gould KL, Ornish D, Scherwitz L, Brown S, Edens RP, Hess MJ, Mullani N, Bolomey L, Dobbs F, Armstrong WT, Merritt T, Ports T, Sparler S, Billings J. Changes in myocardial perfusion abnormalities by positron emission tomography after long-term, intense risk factor modification. JAMA. 1995; 274: 894–901.
82. Watts GF, Lewis B, Brunt JN, Lewis ES, Coltart DJ, Smith LD, Mann JI, Swan AV. Effects on coronary artery disease of lipid-lowering diet, or diet plus cholestyramine, in the St Thomas’ Atherosclerosis Regression Study (STARS). Lancet. 1992; 339: 563–569.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
83. Seiler C, Kirkeeide RL, Gould KL. Basic structure-function relations of the epicardial coronary vascular tree: basis of quantitative coronary arteriography for diffuse coronary artery disease. Circulation. 1992; 85: 1987–2003.
84. De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Heyndrickx GR, Hodeige D, Kirkeeide R, Gould KL. Pressure-derived fractional flow reserve to assess serial epicardial stenoses: theoretical basis and animal validation. Circulation. 2000; 101: 1840–1847.
85. Gould KL, Nakagawa Y, Nakagawa K, Sdringola S, Hess MJ, Haynie M, Parker N, Mullani N, Kirkeeide R. Frequency and clinical implications of fluid dynamically significant diffuse coronary artery disease manifest as graded, longitudinal, base-to-apex myocardial perfusion abnormalities by noninvasive positron emission tomography. Circulation. 2000; 101: 1931–1939.
86. Hernandez-Pampaloni M, Keng FY, Kudo T, Sayre JS, Schelbert HR. Abnormal longitudinal, base-to-apex myocardial perfusion gradient by quantitative blood flow measurements in patients with coronary risk factors. Circulation. 2001; 104: 527–532.
87. Schindler TH, Facta AD, Prior JO, Campisi R, Inubushi M, Kreissl MC, Zhang XL, Sayre J, Dahlbom M, Schelbert HR. PET-measured heterogeneity in longitudinal myocardial blood flow in response to sympathetic and pharmacologic stress as a non-invasive probe of epicardial vasomotor dysfunction. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006; 33: 1140–1149.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
88. Gould KL. Assessing progression or regression of CAD: the role of perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005; 12: 625–638.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
89. Gould KL, Martucci JP, Goldberg DI, Hess MJ, Edens RP, Latifi R, Dudrick SJ. Short-term cholesterol lowering decreases size and severity of perfusion abnormalities by positron emission tomography after dipyridamole in patients with coronary artery disease: a potential noninvasive marker of healing coronary endothelium. Circulation. 1994; 89: 1530–1538.
90. Rudd JH, Warburton EA, Fryer TD, Jones HA, Clark JC, Antoun N, Johnstrom P, Davenport AP, Kirkpatrick PJ, Arch BN, Pickard JD, Weissberg PL. Imaging atherosclerotic plaque inflammation with [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Circulation. 2002; 105: 2708–2711.
91. Tawakol A, Migrino RQ, Hoffmann U, Abbara S, Houser S, Gewirtz H, Muller JE, Brady TJ, Fischman AJ. Noninvasive in vivo measurement of vascular inflammation with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005; 12: 294–301.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
92. Zhang Z, Machac J, Helft G, Worthley SG, Tang C, Zaman AG, Rodriguez OJ, Buchsbaum MS, Fuster V, Badimon JJ. Non-invasive imaging of atherosclerotic plaque macrophage in a rabbit model with F-18 FDG PET: a histopathological correlation. BMC Nucl Med. 2006; 6: 3.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
93. Gould KL. Identifying and measuring severity of coronary artery stenosis: quantitative coronary arteriography and positron emission tomography. Circulation. 1988; 78: 237–245.
94. Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, Marwick TH, Lauer MS, Heller GV, Iskandrian AE, Kesler KL, Travin MI, Lewin HC, Hendel RC, Borges-Neto S, Miller DD; Economics of Noninvasive Diagnosis (END) Multicenter Study Group. The economic consequences of available diagnostic and prognostic strategies for the evaluation of stable angina patients: an observational assessment of the value of precatheterization ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 33: 661–669.
95. Study of Myocardial Perfusion and Coronary Anatomy Imaging Roles in CAD (SPARC) Web page. Available at: http://www.sparctrial.org. Accessed December 2, 2006.
96. Higgins CB, Hagen PL, Newell JD, Schmidt WS, Haigler FH. Contrast enhancement of myocardial infarction: dependence on necrosis and residual blood flow and the relationship to distribution of scintigraphic imaging agents. Circulation. 1982; 65: 739–746.
97. Higgins CB, Siemers PT, Newell JD, Schmidt W. Role of iodinated contrast material in the evaluation of myocardial infarction by computerized transmission tomography. Invest Radiol. 1980; 15: S176–S182.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
98. 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.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
99. Lipton MJ, Farmer DW, Killebrew EJ, Bouchard A, Dean PB, Ringertz HG, Higgins CB. Regional myocardial dysfunction: evaluation of patients with prior myocardial infarction with fast CT. Radiology. 1985; 157: 735–740.
100. Siemers PT, Higgins CB, Schmidt W, Ashburn W, Hagan P. Detection, quantitation and contrast enhancement of myocardial infarction utilizing computerized axial tomography: comparison with histochemical staining and 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging. Invest Radiol. 1978; 13: 103–109.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
101. Doherty PW, Lipton MJ, Berninger WH, Skioldebrand CG, Carlsson E, Redington RW. Detection and quantitation of myocardial infarction in vivo using transmission computed tomography. Circulation. 1981; 63: 597–606.
102. Gerber BL, Belge B, Legros GJ, Lim P, Poncelet A, Pasquet A, Gisellu G, Coche E, Vanoverschelde JL. Characterization of acute and chronic myocardial infarcts by multidetector computed tomography: comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2006; 113: 823–833.
103. Lardo AC, Cordeiro MA, Silva C, Amado LC, George RT, Saliaris AP, Schuleri KH, Fernandes VR, Zviman M, Nazarian S, Halperin HR, Wu KC, Hare JM, Lima JA. Contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography viability imaging after myocardial infarction: characterization of myocyte death, microvascular obstruction, and chronic scar. Circulation. 2006; 113: 394–404.
104. Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Wildberger JE, Spuentrup E, Buecker A, Gunther RW, Kuhl HP. 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: 2042–2047.
105. Thomson LE, Kim RJ, Judd RM. Magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of myocardial viability. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004; 19: 771–788.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
106. Brodoefel H, Klumpp B, Reimann A, Ohmer M, Fenchel M, Schroeder S, Miller S, Claussen C, Kopp AF, Scheule AM. Late myocardial enhancement assessed by 64-MSCT in reperfused porcine myocardial infarction: diagnostic accuracy of low-dose CT protocols in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2007; 17: 475–483.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
107. Gropler RJ, Geltman EM, Sampathkumaran K, Perez JE, Schechtman KB, Conversano A, Siegel BA. Comparison of carbon-11-acetate with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose for delineating viable myocardium by positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993; 22: 1587–1597.[Abstract]
108. Rubin PJ, Lee DS, Davila-Roman VG, Geltman EM, Schechtman KB, Bergmann SR, Gropler RJ. Superiority of C-11 acetate compared with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose in predicting myocardial functional recovery by positron emission tomography in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1996; 78: 1230–1235.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
109. Wolpers HG, Burchert W, van den Hoff J, Weinhardt R, Meyer GJ, Lichtlen PR. Assessment of myocardial viability by use of 11C-acetate and positron emission tomography: threshold criteria of reversible dysfunction. Circulation. 1997; 95: 1417–1424.
110. Di Carli MF. Advances in positron emission tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004; 11: 719–732.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
111. Di Carli MF. Predicting improved function after myocardial revascularization. Curr Opin Cardiol. 1998; 13: 415–424.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
112. Beanlands RS, Ruddy TD, deKemp RA, Iwanochko RM, Coates G, Freeman M, Nahmias C, Hendry P, Burns RJ, Lamy A, Mickleborough L, Kostuk W, Fallen E, Nichol G. Positron emission tomography and recovery following revascularization (PARR-1): the importance of scar and the development of a prediction rule for the degree of recovery of left ventricular function. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002; 40: 1735–1743.
113. Ragosta M, Beller GA, Watson DD, Kaul S, Gimple LW. Quantitative planar rest-redistribution 201Tl imaging in detection of myocardial viability and prediction of improvement in left ventricular function after coronary bypass surgery in patients with severely depressed left ventricular function. Circulation. 1993; 87: 1630–1641.
114. Perrone-Filardi P, Pace L, Prastaro M, Piscione F, Betocchi S, Squame F, Vezzuto P, Soricelli A, Indolfi C, Salvatore M, Chiariello M. Dobutamine echocardiography predicts improvement of hypoperfused dysfunctional myocardium after revascularization in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation. 1995; 91: 2556–2565.
115. Kim RJ, Wu E, Rafael A, Chen EL, Parker MA, Simonetti O, Klocke FJ, Bonow RO, Judd RM. The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2000; 343: 1445–1453.
116. Di Carli MF, Asgarzadie F, Schelbert HR, Brunken RC, Laks H, Phelps ME, Maddahi J. Quantitative relation between myocardial viability and improvement in heart failure symptoms after revascularization in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Circulation. 1995; 92: 3436–3444.
117. Rohatgi R, Epstein S, Henriquez J, Ababneh AA, Hickey KT, Pinsky D, Akinboboye O, Bergmann SR. Utility of positron emission tomography in predicting cardiac events and survival in patients with coronary artery disease and severe left ventricular dysfunction. Am J Cardiol. 2001; 87: 1096–1099, A1096.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
118. Marwick TH, Zuchowski C, Lauer MS, Secknus MA, Williams J, Lytle BW. Functional status and quality of life in patients with heart failure undergoing coronary bypass surgery after assessment of myocardial viability. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 33: 750–758.
119. Senior R, Kaul S, Raval U, Lahiri A. Impact of revascularization and myocardial viability determined by nitrate-enhanced Tc-99m sestamibi and Tl-201 imaging on mortality and functional outcome in ischemic cardiomyopathy. J Nucl Cardiol. 2002; 9: 454–462.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
120. Bax JJ, Poldermans D, Elhendy A, Cornel JH, Boersma E, Rambaldi R, Roelandt JR, Fioretti PM. Improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction, heart failure symptoms and prognosis after revascularization in patients with chronic coronary artery disease and viable myocardium detected by dobutamine stress echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 34: 163–169.
121. Allman K, Shaw, LJ, Hachamovitch, R, Udelson, JE. Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002; 39: 1151–1158.
122. Udelson JE, Bonow RO, Dilsizian V. The historical and conceptual evolution of radionuclide assessment of myocardial viability. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004; 11: 318–334.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
123. SOMATOM Definition dual-source CT. Siemens Web page. Available at: http://healthcare.siemens.com/ct_applications/dualsource/somatom/index2.html. Accessed December 2, 2006.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  J. Knuuti Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in coronary disease Heart, September 1, 2009; 95(17): 1457 - 1463. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Dorbala, R. Hachamovitch, Z. Curillova, D. Thomas, D. Vangala, R. Y. Kwong, and M. F. Di Carli Incremental Prognostic Value of Gated Rb-82 Positron Emission Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Over Clinical Variables and Rest LVEF J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img., July 1, 2009; 2(7): 846 - 854. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. S. Douglas, A. Taylor, D. Bild, R. Bonow, P. Greenland, M. Lauer, F. Peacock, and J. Udelson Outcomes Research in Cardiovascular Imaging: Report of a Workshop Sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img., July 1, 2009; 2(7): 897 - 907. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. S. Douglas, A. Taylor, D. Bild, R. Bonow, P. Greenland, M. Lauer, F. Peacock, and J. Udelson Outcomes Research in Cardiovascular Imaging: Report of a Workshop Sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, July 1, 2009; 2(4): 339 - 348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. M. Bengel, T. Higuchi, M. S. Javadi, and R. Lautamaki Cardiac positron emission tomography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 30, 2009; 54(1): 1 - 15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S.G. Nekolla, S. Reder, A. Saraste, T. Higuchi, G. Dzewas, A. Preissel, M. Huisman, T. Poethko, T. Schuster, M. Yu, et al. Evaluation of the Novel Myocardial Perfusion Positron-Emission Tomography Tracer 18F-BMS-747158-02: Comparison to 13N-Ammonia and Validation With Microspheres in a Pig Model Circulation, May 5, 2009; 119(17): 2333 - 2342. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. K. Min and D. Berman Anatomic and Functional Assessment of Coronary Artery Disease: Convergence of 2 Aims in a Single Setting Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, May 1, 2009; 2(3): 163 - 165. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T Chua The evolving role of molecular imaging for coronary artery disease: where do we stand today? Heart Asia, March 6, 2009; 2009(2): 1 - 5. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Holz, R. Lautamaki, T. Sasano, J. Merrill, S. G. Nekolla, A. C. Lardo, and F. M. Bengel Expanding the Versatility of Cardiac PET/CT: Feasibility of Delayed Contrast Enhancement CT for Infarct Detection in a Porcine Model J. Nucl. Med., February 1, 2009; 50(2): 259 - 265. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. J.W. Chow, A. Abraham, G. A. Wells, L. Chen, T. D. Ruddy, Y. Yam, N. Govas, P. D. Galbraith, C. Dennie, and R. S. Beanlands Diagnostic Accuracy and Impact of Computed Tomographic Coronary Angiography on Utilization of Invasive Coronary Angiography Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, January 1, 2009; 2(1): 16 - 23. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. K. Min, N. Kang, L. J. Shaw, R. B. Devereux, M. Robinson, F. Lin, A. P. Legorreta, and A. Gilmore Costs and Clinical Outcomes after Coronary Multidetector CT Angiography in Patients without Known Coronary Artery Disease: Comparison to Myocardial Perfusion SPECT Radiology, October 1, 2008; 249(1): 62 - 70. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Van Brabandt Recommendations or mere prose? Eur. Heart J., June 1, 2008; 29(11): 1473 - 1473. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Hachamovitch and M. F. Di Carli Methods and Limitations of Assessing New Noninvasive Tests: Part I: Anatomy-Based Validation of Noninvasive Testing Circulation, May 20, 2008; 117(20): 2684 - 2690. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. P. Schenker, S. Dorbala, E. C. T. Hong, F. J. Rybicki, R. Hachamovitch, R. Y. Kwong, and M. F. Di Carli Interrelation of Coronary Calcification, Myocardial Ischemia, and Outcomes in Patients With Intermediate Likelihood of Coronary Artery Disease: A Combined Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Study Circulation, April 1, 2008; 117(13): 1693 - 1700. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Knuuti and F M Bengel Positron emission tomography and molecular imaging Heart, March 1, 2008; 94(3): 360 - 367. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. L. Gerber MR perfusion imaging. What will be its impact for detection of coronary disease in the future? Eur. Heart J., February 2, 2008; 29(4): 434 - 435. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. M. Bateman Business aspects of cardiovascular computed tomography: tackling the challenges. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img., January 1, 2008; 1(1): 111 - 118. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. F. Di Carli, S. Dorbala, J. Meserve, G. El Fakhri, A. Sitek, and S. C. Moore Clinical Myocardial Perfusion PET/CT J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2007; 48(5): 783 - 793. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||