Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Comprehensive Cardiovascular Medicine in the Primary Care Setting pp 481–510Cite as

Cardiac Computed Tomography

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1050 Accesses

Part of the book series: Contemporary Cardiology ((CONCARD))

Abstract

During the last two decades, cardiac computed tomography (CT) has emerged as a routine procedure to investigate patients with cardiovascular issues and has revolutionized clinical practice. The rapid technical improvement of the scanner technology has led to a continuous improvement of image quality, reduction of radiation exposure, shorter scan times, and continuously decreasing amounts of the potentially nephrotoxic contrast media, making the cardiac CT accessible even for patients with impaired health conditions. The dramatically improved accuracy of the cardiac CT has been tested in many randomized clinical trials, which have validated the cardiac CT as an accurate alternative to numerous routinely used, partially invasive assessment techniques in patients with suspected cardiovascular issues.

This chapter provides a clear and brief technical and methodical background of cardiac CT as a diagnostic method, delivers a basic description of fundamental anatomical cardiac structures, sums up the requirements for adequate patient selection, and finally helps to plan a successful examination of coronary arteries according to recent guidelines. Furthermore, frequent pitfalls and future outlooks are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(22):2277–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Achenbach S, Giesler T, Ropers D, Ulzheimer S, Derlien H, Schulte C, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses by contrast-enhanced, retrospectively electrocardiographically-gated, multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation. 2001;103(21):2535–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Abbara S, Blanke P, Maroules CD, Cheezum M, Choi AD, Han BK, et al. SCCT guidelines for the performance and acquisition of coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee: endorsed by the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2016;10(6):435–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee AM, Beaudoin J, Engel L-C, Sidhu MS, Abbara S, Brady TJ, et al. Assessment of image quality and radiation dose of prospectively ECG-triggered adaptive dual-source coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA) with arrhythmia rejection algorithm in systole versus diastole: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;29(6):1361–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Herzog C, Arning-Erb M, Zangos S, Eichler K, Hammerstingl R, Dogan S, et al. Multi-detector row CT coronary angiography: influence of reconstruction technique and heart rate on image quality. Radiology. 2006;238(1):75–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hoffmann MHK, Shi H, Manzke R, Schmid FT, De Vries L, Grass M, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 16-detector row CT: effect of heart rate. Radiology. 2005;234(1):86–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Leipsic J, LaBounty TM, Ajlan AM, Earls JP, Strovski E, Madden M, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing image quality, study interpretability, and radiation dose of narrow acquisition window with widened acquisition window protocols in prospectively ECG-triggered coronary computed tomography angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2013;7(1):18–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Seifarth H, Wienbeck S, Püsken M, Juergens K-U, Maintz D, Vahlhaus C, et al. Optimal systolic and diastolic reconstruction windows for coronary CT angiography using dual-source CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189(6):1317–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. McDonald RJ, McDonald JS, Carter RE, Hartman RP, Katzberg RW, Kallmes DF, et al. Intravenous contrast material exposure is not an independent risk factor for dialysis or mortality. Radiology. 2014;273(3):714–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Achenbach S, Manolopoulos M, Schuhbäck A, Ropers D, Rixe J, Schneider C, et al. Influence of heart rate and phase of the cardiac cycle on the occurrence of motion artifact in dual-source CT angiography of the coronary arteries. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2012;6(2):91–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Leipsic J, Abbara S, Achenbach S, Cury R, Earls JP, Mancini GJ, et al. SCCT guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of coronary CT angiography: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8(5):342–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cury RC, Abbara S, Achenbach S, Agatston A, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, et al. CAD-RADS™: coronary artery disease—reporting and data system: an expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI). Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(12 Pt A):1458–1466.e9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Verdun FR, Bochud F, Gundinchet F, Aroua A, Schnyder P, Meuli R. Quality initiatives* radiation risk: what you should know to tell your patient. Radiographics. 2008;28(7):1807–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Menke J, Unterberg-Buchwald C, Staab W, Sohns JM, Seif Amir Hosseini A, Schwarz A. Head-to-head comparison of prospectively triggered vs retrospectively gated coronary computed tomography angiography: meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy, image quality, and radiation dose. Am Heart J. 2013;165(2):154–163.e3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS, Carr JJ, Goldin JG, Greenland P, et al. Assessment of coronary artery disease by cardiac computed tomography: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and Committee on Cardiac Imaging, Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation. 2006;114(16):1761–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA. 2007;298(3):317–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Deseive S, Chen MY, Korosoglou G, Leipsic J, Martuscelli E, Carrascosa P, et al. Prospective randomized trial on radiation dose estimates of CT angiography applying iterative image reconstruction: the PROTECTION V study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8(8):888–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Brasselet C, Blanpain T, Tassan-Mangina S, Deschildre A, Duval S, Vitry F, et al. Comparison of operator radiation exposure with optimized radiation protection devices during coronary angiograms and ad hoc percutaneous coronary interventions by radial and femoral routes. Eur Heart J. 2008;29(1):63–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Einstein AJ. Radiation risk from coronary artery disease imaging: how do different diagnostic tests compare? Heart. 2008;94(12):1519–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pflederer T, Rudofsky L, Ropers D, Bachmann S, Marwan M, Daniel WG, et al. Image quality in a low radiation exposure protocol for retrospectively ECG-gated coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(4):1045–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, Adda O, Treyer V, Wyss CA, et al. Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. Eur Heart J. 2008;29(2):191–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, Hadamitzky M, Krebs M, Gerber TC, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA. 2009;301(5):500–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, Mark D, Min J, O’Gara P, et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2010;4(6):407.e1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bhuiya FA, Pitts SR, McCaig LF. Emergency department visits for chest pain and abdominal pain: United States, 1999–2008. NCHS Data Brief. 2010;43:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Hoffmann U, Pena AJ, Moselewski F, Ferencik M, Abbara S, Cury RC, et al. MDCT in early triage of patients with acute chest pain. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187(5):1240–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rybicki FJ, Udelson JE, Peacock WF, Goldhaber SZ, Isselbacher EM, Kazerooni E, et al. 2015 ACR/ACC/AHA/AATS/ACEP/ASNC/NASCI/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR/SCPC/SNMMI/STR/STS appropriate utilization of cardiovascular imaging in emergency department patients with chest pain: a joint document of the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Committee and the American College of Cardiology Appropriate use Criteria Task Force. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(7):853–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hoffmann U, Nagurney JT, Moselewski F, Pena A, Ferencik M, Chae CU, et al. Coronary multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of patients with acute chest pain. Circulation. 2006;114(21):2251–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rubinshtein R, Halon DA, Gaspar T, Jaffe R, Goldstein J, Karkabi B, et al. Impact of 64-slice cardiac computed tomographic angiography on clinical decision-making in emergency department patients with chest pain of possible myocardial ischemic origin. Am J Cardiol. 2007;100(10):1522–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rubinshtein R, Halon DA, Gaspar T, Jaffe R, Karkabi B, Flugelman MY, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice cardiac computed tomographic angiography for diagnosing acute coronary syndromes and predicting clinical outcome in emergency department patients with chest pain of uncertain origin. Circulation. 2007;115(13):1762–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hoffmann U, Truong QA, Schoenfeld DA, Chou ET, Woodard PK, Nagurney JT, et al. Coronary CT angiography versus standard evaluation in acute chest pain. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(4):299–308.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Goldstein JA, Chinnaiyan KM, Abidov A, Achenbach S, Berman DS, Hayes SW, et al. The CT-STAT (coronary computed tomographic angiography for systematic triage of acute chest pain patients to treatment) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(14):1414–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Litt HI, Gatsonis C, Snyder B, Singh H, Miller CD, Entrikin DW, et al. CT angiography for safe discharge of patients with possible acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(15):1393–403.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Johnson TRC, Nikolaou K, Wintersperger BJ, Knez A, Boekstegers P, Reiser MF, et al. ECG-gated 64-MDCT angiography in the differential diagnosis of acute chest pain. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(1):76–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wnorowski AM, Halpern EJ. Diagnostic yield of triple-rule-out CT in an emergency setting. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;17:W1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Takakuwa KM, Halpern EJ. Evaluation of a “triple rule-out” coronary CT angiography protocol: use of 64-section CT in low-to-moderate risk emergency department patients suspected of having acute coronary syndrome. Radiology. 2008;248(2):438–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Burris AC, Boura JA, Raff GL, Chinnaiyan KM. Triple rule out versus coronary CT angiography in patients with acute chest pain: results from the ACIC consortium. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8(7):817–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ayaram D, Bellolio MF, Murad MH, Laack TA, Sadosty AT, Erwin PJ, et al. Triple rule-out computed tomographic angiography for chest pain: a diagnostic systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Emerg Med Off J Soc Acad Emerg Med. 2013;20(9):861–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Dedic A, Nieman K, Hoffmann U, Ferencik M. Cardiac CT in the emergency department in the era of highly-sensitive troponins: is there still a role? Minerva Cardioangiol. 2017;65:214–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Diamond GA, Forrester JS. Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1979;300(24):1350–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hamon M, Morello R, Riddell JW, Hamon M. Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography--meta-analysis. Radiology. 2007;245(3):720–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Cury RC, Ferencik M, Achenbach S, Pomerantsev E, Nieman K, Moselewski F, et al. Accuracy of 16-slice multi-detector CT to quantify the degree of coronary artery stenosis: assessment of cross-sectional and longitudinal vessel reconstructions. Eur J Radiol. 2006;57(3):345–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Cury RC, Pomerantsev EV, Ferencik M, Hoffmann U, Nieman K, Moselewski F, et al. Comparison of the degree of coronary stenoses by multidetector computed tomography versus by quantitative coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol. 2005;96(6):784–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. de Graaf MA, Broersen A, Kitslaar PH, Roos CJ, Dijkstra J, Lelieveldt BPF, et al. Automatic quantification and characterization of coronary atherosclerosis with computed tomography coronary angiography: cross-correlation with intravascular ultrasound virtual histology. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;29(5):1177–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Dodd JD, Rieber J, Pomerantsev E, Chaithiraphan V, Achenbach S, Moreiras JM, et al. Quantification of nonculprit coronary lesions: comparison of cardiac 64-MDCT and invasive coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191(2):432–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Iskander S, Iskandrian AE. Risk assessment using single-photon emission computed tomographic technetium-99m sestamibi imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32(1):57–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sato A, Hiroe M, Tamura M, Ohigashi H, Nozato T, Hikita H, et al. Quantitative measures of coronary stenosis severity by 64-slice CT angiography and relation to physiologic significance of perfusion in nonobese patients: comparison with stress myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(4):564–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Meijboom WB, Van Mieghem CAG, van Pelt N, Weustink A, Pugliese F, Mollet NR, et al. Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery stenoses: computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography and correlation with fractional flow reserve in patients with stable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(8):636–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Koo B-K, Erglis A, Doh J-H, Daniels DV, Jegere S, Kim H-S, et al. Diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(19):1989–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Hoffmann U, Massaro JM, D’Agostino RB, Kathiresan S, Fox CS, O’Donnell CJ. Cardiovascular event prediction and risk reclassification by coronary, aortic, and valvular calcification in the Framingham Heart Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(2):pii: e003144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Detrano R, Guerci AD, Carr JJ, Bild DE, Burke G, Folsom AR, et al. Coronary calcium as a predictor of coronary events in four racial or ethnic groups. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(13):1336–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Witteman JC, Kannel WB, Wolf PA, Grobbee DE, Hofman A, D’Agostino RB, et al. Aortic calcified plaques and cardiovascular disease (the Framingham Study). Am J Cardiol. 1990;66(15):1060–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Sarwar A, Shaw LJ, Shapiro MD, Blankstein R, Hoffmann U, Hoffman U, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic value of absence of coronary artery calcification. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(6):675–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Blaha MJ, Cainzos-Achirica M, Greenland P, McEvoy JW, Blankstein R, Budoff MJ, et al. Role of coronary artery calcium score of zero and other negative risk markers for cardiovascular disease: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circulation. 2016;133(9):849–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Authors/Task Force Members, Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, Collet J-P, Cremer J, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J. 2014;35(37):2541–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. D’Ascenzo F, Barbero U, Moretti C, Palmerini T, Della Riva D, Mariani A, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft for stable angina: meta-regression of randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2014;38(1):51–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Malagutti P, Nieman K, Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CAG, Pugliese F, Cademartiri F, et al. Use of 64-slice CT in symptomatic patients after coronary bypass surgery: evaluation of grafts and coronary arteries. Eur Heart J. 2007;28(15):1879–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D’Eliseo A, Tomassini M, Razzini C, Sperandio M, et al. Evaluation of venous and arterial conduit patency by 16-slice spiral computed tomography. Circulation. 2004;110(20):3234–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Meyer TS, Martinoff S, Hadamitzky M, Will A, Kastrati A, Schömig A, et al. Improved noninvasive assessment of coronary artery bypass grafts with 64-slice computed tomographic angiography in an unselected patient population. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(9):946–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Nieman K, Pattynama PMT, Rensing BJ, Van Geuns R-JM, De Feyter PJ. Evaluation of patients after coronary artery bypass surgery: CT angiographic assessment of grafts and coronary arteries. Radiology. 2003;229(3):749–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Pache G, Saueressig U, Frydrychowicz A, Foell D, Ghanem N, Kotter E, et al. Initial experience with 64-slice cardiac CT: non-invasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts. Eur Heart J. 2006;27(8):976–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Ropers D, Pohle F-K, Kuettner A, Pflederer T, Anders K, Daniel WG, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography in patients after bypass surgery using 64-slice spiral computed tomography with 330-ms gantry rotation. Circulation. 2006;114(22):2334–41; quiz 2334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Schlosser T, Konorza T, Hunold P, Kühl H, Schmermund A, Barkhausen J. Noninvasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts using 16-detector row computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(6):1224–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Barbero U, Iannaccone M, d’Ascenzo F, Barbero C, Mohamed A, Annone U, et al. 64 slice-coronary computed tomography sensitivity and specificity in the evaluation of coronary artery bypass graft stenosis: a meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2016;216:52–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Angelini P. Coronary artery anomalies--current clinical issues: definitions, classification, incidence, clinical relevance, and treatment guidelines. Tex Heart Inst J. 2002;29(4):271–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Basso C, Maron BJ, Corrado D, Thiene G. Clinical profile of congenital coronary artery anomalies with origin from the wrong aortic sinus leading to sudden death in young competitive athletes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35(6):1493–501.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Cheitlin MD, De Castro CM, McAllister HA. Sudden death as a complication of anomalous left coronary origin from the anterior sinus of Valsalva. A not-so-minor congenital anomaly. Circulation. 1974;50(4):780–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Liberthson RR. Sudden death from cardiac causes in children and young adults. N Engl J Med. 1996;334(16):1039–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Maron BJ, Shirani J, Poliac LC, Mathenge R, Roberts WC, Mueller FO. Sudden death in young competitive athletes. Clinical, demographic, and pathological profiles. JAMA. 1996;276(3):199–204.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Taylor AJ, Rogan KM, Virmani R. Sudden cardiac death associated with isolated congenital coronary artery anomalies. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;20(3):640–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Angelini P. Coronary artery anomalies: an entity in search of an identity. Circulation. 2007;115(10):1296–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Gilard M, Cornily J-C, Pennec P-Y, Joret C, Le Gal G, Mansourati J, et al. Accuracy of multislice computed tomography in the preoperative assessment of coronary disease in patients with aortic valve stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(10):2020–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, Makkar RR, Svensson LG, Kodali SK, et al. Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(17):1609–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, Miller DC, Moses JW, Svensson LG, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(17):1597–607.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, Miller DC, Moses JW, Svensson LG, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(23):2187–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Schoenhagen P, Tuzcu EM, Kapadia SR, Desai MY, Svensson LG. Three-dimensional imaging of the aortic valve and aortic root with computed tomography: new standards in an era of transcatheter valve repair/implantation. Eur Heart J. 2009;30(17):2079–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Holmes DR, Mack MJ, Kaul S, Agnihotri A, Alexander KP, Bailey SR, et al. 2012 ACCF/AATS/SCAI/STS expert consensus document on transcatheter aortic valve replacement: developed in collaboration with the American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Heart Failure Society of America, Mended Hearts, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;144(3):e29–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Opolski MP, Kim W-K, Liebetrau C, Walther C, Blumenstein J, Gaede L, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography angiography for the detection of coronary artery disease in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Clin Res Cardiol. 2015;104(6):471–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Lehmkuhl L, Foldyna B, Von Aspern K, Lücke C, Grothoff M, Nitzsche S, et al. Inter-individual variance and cardiac cycle dependency of aortic root dimensions and shape as assessed by ECG-gated multi-slice computed tomography in patients with severe aortic stenosis prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation: is it crucial for correct sizing? Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;29(3):693–703.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Chenot F, Montant P, Goffinet C, Pasquet A, Vancraeynest D, Coche E, et al. Evaluation of anatomic valve opening and leaflet morphology in aortic valve bioprosthesis by using multidetector CT: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography. Radiology. 2010;255(2):377–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Bittner DO, Arnold M, Klinghammer L, Schuhbaeck A, Hell MM, Muschiol G, et al. Contrast volume reduction using third generation dual source computed tomography for the evaluation of patients prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur Radiol. 2016;26(12):4497–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Binder RK, Leipsic J, Wood D, Moore T, Toggweiler S, Willson A, et al. Prediction of optimal deployment projection for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: angiographic 3-dimensional reconstruction of the aortic root versus multidetector computed tomography. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(2):247–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Gurvitch R, Wood DA, Leipsic J, Tay E, Johnson M, Ye J, et al. Multislice computed tomography for prediction of optimal angiographic deployment projections during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3(11):1157–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Ganesan AN, Shipp NJ, Brooks AG, Kuklik P, Lau DH, Lim HS, et al. Long-term outcomes of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2(2):e004549. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3647286/

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Calkins H, Kuck KH, Cappato R, Brugada J, Camm AJ, Chen S-A, et al. 2012 HRS/EHRA/ECAS expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: recommendations for patient selection, procedural techniques, patient management and follow-up, definitions, endpoints, and research trial design: a report of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) Task Force on Catheter and Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation. Developed in partnership with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Cardiac Arrhythmia Society (ECAS); and in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology (ACC), American Heart Association (AHA), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS). Endorsed by the governing bodies of the American College of Cardiology Foundation, the American Heart Association, the European Cardiac Arrhythmia Society, the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Society of Thoracic Surgeons, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, and the Heart Rhythm Society. Heart Rhythm. 2012;9(4):632–696.e21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Jongbloed MRM, Dirksen MS, Bax JJ, Boersma E, Geleijns K, Lamb HJ, et al. Atrial fibrillation: multi-detector row CT of pulmonary vein anatomy prior to radiofrequency catheter ablation--initial experience. Radiology. 2005;234(3):702–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Cronin P, Kelly AM, Desjardins B, Patel S, Gross BH, Kazerooni EA, et al. Normative analysis of pulmonary vein drainage patterns on multidetector CT with measurements of pulmonary vein ostial diameter and distance to first bifurcation. Acad Radiol. 2007;14(2):178–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Cappato R, Calkins H, Chen S-A, Davies W, Iesaka Y, Kalman J, et al. Worldwide survey on the methods, efficacy, and safety of catheter ablation for human atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2005;111(9):1100–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Scharf C, Ng GA, Wieczorek M, Deneke T, Furniss SS, Murray S, et al. European survey on efficacy and safety of duty-cycled radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2012;14(12):1700–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Spuentrup E, Busch P, Wildberger JE, et al. Sixteen-slice spiral CT versus MR imaging for the assessment of left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(4):714–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Henneman MM, Bax JJ, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, Holman ER, Stokkel MPM, et al. Global and regional left ventricular function: a comparison between gated SPECT, 2D echocardiography and multi-slice computed tomography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33(12):1452–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Leber AW, Knez A, Becker A, Becker C, von Ziegler F, Nikolaou K, et al. Accuracy of multidetector spiral computed tomography in identifying and differentiating the composition of coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a comparative study with intracoronary ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(7):1241–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Achenbach S, Moselewski F, Ropers D, Ferencik M, Hoffmann U, MacNeill B, et al. Detection of calcified and noncalcified coronary atherosclerotic plaque by contrast-enhanced, submillimeter multidetector spiral computed tomography: a segment-based comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Circulation. 2004;109(1):14–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Pohle K, Achenbach S, Macneill B, Ropers D, Ferencik M, Moselewski F, et al. Characterization of non-calcified coronary atherosclerotic plaque by multi-detector row CT: comparison to IVUS. Atherosclerosis. 2007;190(1):174–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Leber AW, Becker A, Knez A, von Ziegler F, Sirol M, Nikolaou K, et al. Accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography to classify and quantify plaque volumes in the proximal coronary system: a comparative study using intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(3):672–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Cademartiri F, La Grutta L, Palumbo AA, Maffei E, Runza G, Bartolotta TV, et al. Coronary plaque imaging with multislice computed tomography: technique and clinical applications. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(Suppl 7):M44–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Boogers MJ, Broersen A, van Velzen JE, de Graaf FR, El-Naggar HM, Kitslaar PH, et al. Automated quantification of coronary plaque with computed tomography: comparison with intravascular ultrasound using a dedicated registration algorithm for fusion-based quantification. Eur Heart J. 2012;33(8):1007–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Rodriguez K, Kwan AC, Lai S, Lima JAC, Vigneault D, Sandfort V, et al. Coronary plaque burden at coronary CT angiography in asymptomatic men and women. Radiology. 2015;277(1):73–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Heo R, Park H-B, Lee BK, Shin S, Arsanjani R, Min JK, et al. Optimal boundary detection method and window settings for coronary atherosclerotic plaque volume analysis in coronary computed tomography angiography: comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Eur Radiol. 2016;26(9):3190–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Park H-B, Lee BK, Shin S, Heo R, Arsanjani R, Kitslaar PH, et al. Clinical feasibility of 3D automated coronary atherosclerotic plaque quantification algorithm on coronary computed tomography angiography: comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Eur Radiol. 2015;25(10):3073–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Moselewski F, Ropers D, Pohle K, Hoffmann U, Ferencik M, Chan RC, et al. Comparison of measurement of cross-sectional coronary atherosclerotic plaque and vessel areas by 16-slice multidetector computed tomography versus intravascular ultrasound. Am J Cardiol. 2004;94(10):1294–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Nieman K, Jang I-K, Ferencik M, Rahman AM, et al. Noninvasive assessment of plaque morphology and composition in culprit and stable lesions in acute coronary syndrome and stable lesions in stable angina by multidetector computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(8):1655–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Hoffmann U, MacNeill B, Baum U, Pohle K, et al. Assessment of coronary remodeling in stenotic and nonstenotic coronary atherosclerotic lesions by multidetector spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(5):842–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Narula J, Nakano M, Virmani R, Kolodgie FD, Petersen R, Newcomb R, et al. Histopathologic characteristics of atherosclerotic coronary disease and implications of the findings for the invasive and noninvasive detection of vulnerable plaques. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(10):1041–51.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Bech GJ, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, de Muinck ED, Hoorntje JC, Escaned J, et al. Fractional flow reserve to determine the appropriateness of angioplasty in moderate coronary stenosis: a randomized trial. Circulation. 2001;103(24):2928–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Muller O, Mangiacapra F, Ntalianis A, Verhamme KMC, Trana C, Hamilos M, et al. Long-term follow-up after fractional flow reserve-guided treatment strategy in patients with an isolated proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4(11):1175–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Gijsen FJH, Wentzel JJ, Thury A, Mastik F, Schaar JA, Schuurbiers JCH, et al. Strain distribution over plaques in human coronary arteries relates to shear stress. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2008;295(4):H1608–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Douglas PS, Pontone G, Hlatky MA, Patel MR, Norgaard BL, Byrne RA, et al. Clinical outcomes of fractional flow reserve by computed tomographic angiography-guided diagnostic strategies vs. usual care in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the prospective longitudinal trial of FFR(CT): outcome and resource impacts study. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(47):3359–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Baks T, Cademartiri F, Moelker AD, Weustink AC, van Geuns R-J, Mollet NR, et al. Multislice computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of reperfused acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(1):144–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. George RT, Ichihara T, Lima JAC, Lardo AC. A method for reconstructing the arterial input function during helical CT: implications for myocardial perfusion distribution imaging. Radiology. 2010;255(2):396–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Gerber BL, Belge B, Legros GJ, Lim P, Poncelet A, Pasquet A, et al. Characterization of acute and chronic myocardial infarcts by multidetector computed tomography: comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2006;113(6):823–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Habis M, Capderou A, Ghostine S, Daoud B, Caussin C, Riou J-Y, et al. Acute myocardial infarction early viability assessment by 64-slice computed tomography immediately after coronary angiography: comparison with low-dose dobutamine echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(11):1178–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Hoffmann U, Millea R, Enzweiler C, Ferencik M, Gulick S, Titus J, et al. Acute myocardial infarction: contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT in a porcine model. Radiology. 2004;231(3):697–701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Wildberger JE, Spuentrup E, Buecker A, et al. Assessment of myocardial viability in reperfused acute myocardial infarction using 16-slice computed tomography in comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45(12):2042–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Nieman K, Shapiro MD, Ferencik M, Nomura CH, Abbara S, Hoffmann U, et al. Reperfused myocardial infarction: contrast-enhanced 64-section CT in comparison to MR imaging. Radiology. 2008;247(1):49–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Mendoza DD, Joshi SB, Weissman G, Taylor AJ, Weigold WG. Viability imaging by cardiac computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2010;4(2):83–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Dwivedi G, Al-Shehri H, deKemp RA, Ali I, Alghamdi AA, Klein R, et al. Scar imaging using multislice computed tomography versus metabolic imaging by F-18 FDG positron emission tomography: a pilot study. Int J Cardiol. 2013;168(2):739–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. le Polain de Waroux J-B, Pouleur A-C, Goffinet C, Pasquet A, Vanoverschelde J-L, Gerber BL. Combined coronary and late-enhanced multidetector-computed tomography for delineation of the etiology of left ventricular dysfunction: comparison with coronary angiography and contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Heart J. 2008;29(20):2544–51.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Sørgaard MH, Kofoed KF, Linde JJ, George RT, Rochitte CE, Feuchtner G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of static CT perfusion for the detection of myocardial ischemia. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2016;10(6):450–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Chang H-J, George RT, Schuleri KH, Evers K, Kitagawa K, Lima JAC, et al. Prospective electrocardiogram-gated delayed enhanced multidetector computed tomography accurately quantifies infarct size and reduces radiation exposure. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(4):412–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Min JK, Lin FY, Saba S. Coronary CT angiography: clinical utility and prognosis. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2009;11(1):47–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital - Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Borek Foldyna, Michael Lu & Udo Hoffmann

Authors
  1. Borek Foldyna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Udo Hoffmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Udo Hoffmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Peter P. Toth

  2. Cardiovascular Division, Harvard Medical School Brigham & Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Christopher P. Cannon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Foldyna, B., Lu, M., Hoffmann, U. (2019). Cardiac Computed Tomography. In: Toth, P., Cannon, C. (eds) Comprehensive Cardiovascular Medicine in the Primary Care Setting. Contemporary Cardiology. Humana Press, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97622-8_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97622-8_26

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97621-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97622-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation