Assessment of Myocardial Viability in Reperfused Acute Myocardial Infarction Using 16-Slice Computed Tomography in Comparison to Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Andreas H. Mahnken, MD*,*,
Ralf Koos, MD ,
Marcus Katoh, MD*,
Joachim E. Wildberger, MD*,
Elmar Spuentrup, MD*,
Arno Buecker, MD*,
Rolf W. Günther, MD* and
Harald P. Kühl, MD
* Diagnostic Radiology, University-Hospital, Aachen, Germany.
Medical Clinic I, University-Hospital, Aachen, Germany.

View larger version (23K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1 The dot-and-line diagrams for early-phase multislice spiral computed tomography (MSCT) (A) and late-enhancement MSCT (B) show the differences in the computerized tomography values between infarcted and normal myocardium.
|
|

View larger version (126K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2 Short-axis view magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (A,D,G) and short-axis multislice spiral computed tomography (MSCT) images (B,C,E,F,H,I) in three different patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) (arrows) attributable to left anterior descending (A to C), right coronary artery (D to F), and left circumflex artery (G to I) occlusion after successful revascularization. There was an excellent agreement between delayed-enhancement MRI (A,D,G) and late-enhancement MSCT (B,E,H). Agreement with arterial-phase MSCT (C,F,I) was slightly worse.
|
|

View larger version (25K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3 Bland-Altman plots comparing MI size between delayed-enhancement MRI and late-enhancement MSCT (A), MRI and early-phase MSCT (B), and late-enhancement MSCT and early-phase MSCT (C). Abbreviations as in Figures 1 and 2.
|
|
|