CLINICAL RESEARCH: NON-INVASIVE CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY
Non-Invasive Detection of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Left Bundle Branch Block Using 64-Slice Computed Tomography
Saïd Ghostine, MD*,*,
Christophe Caussin, MD*,
Béatrice Daoud, MD ,
Michel Habis, MD*,
Eric Perrier, MD ,
David Pesenti-Rossi, MD*,
Anne Sigal-Cinqualbre, MD,
Claude-Yves Angel, MD,
Bernard Lancelin, MD*,
André Capderou, MD, PhD and
Jean-François Paul, MD
* Department of Cardiology, Marie Lannelongue Hospital, Le Plessis Robinson, France
Department of Radiology, Marie Lannelongue Hospital, Le Plessis Robinson, France
CNRS UMR 8162, Marie Lannelongue Hospital, Le Plessis Robinson, France
Department of Aeronautical Cardiology, HIA Percy, Clamart, France.
Manuscript received February 27, 2006;
revised manuscript received April 11, 2006,
accepted April 25, 2006.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Saïd Ghostine, Marie Lannelongue Hospital, 133 avenue de la Resistance, 92350 Le Plessis Robinson, France. (Email: ghostine{at}ccml.com).
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography (CT) to identify coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with complete left bundle branch block (LBBB).
BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch block increases risk of cardiac mortality, and prognosis is primarily determined by the underlying coronary disease. Non-invasive stress tests have limited performance, and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) is usually required.
METHODS: Sixty-six consecutive patients with complete LBBB and sinus rhythm admitted for CCA were enrolled. Computed tomography was performed 3 ± 3.9 days before CCA. The accuracy of 64-slice CT to detect significant stenosis (>50% lumen narrowing) was compared with quantitative coronary angiography. All segments were analyzed regardless of image quality from coronary calcification or motion artifacts. Results were analyzed by patient and by coronary segment (990) using the American Heart Association 15-segment model.
RESULTS: Lower heart rates were associated with improved image quality. Computed tomography correctly identified 35 of 37 (95%) patients without significant stenosis and 28 of 29 (97%) patients with significant stenosis on CCA. Computed tomography correctly assessed 68 of 94 (72%) significant stenosis. Overall, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 64-slice CT for identifying CAD by patient was 95%, 97%, 95%, 93%, and 97%, respectively, and by segment was 97%, 72%, 99%, 91%, and 97%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In a routine clinical practice, 64-slice CT detects with excellent accuracy a significant CAD in patients with complete LBBB. A normal CT in this clinical setting is a robust tool to act as a filter and avoid invasive diagnostic procedures.
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | CAD = coronary artery disease | | CCA = conventional coronary angiography | | CT = computed tomography | | LAD = left anterior descending coronary artery | | LBBB = left bundle branch block | | LCX = left circumflex artery | | LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction | | MSCT = multislice computed tomography | | QCA = quantitative coronary angiography | | RCA = right coronary artery |
|
Left bundle branch block (LBBB) correlates strongly to age (1,2) and increases risk of cardiac mortality (1–7). Prognosis is primarily determined by the underlying cardiac pathology (3–5). Left bundle branch block is most commonly associated with atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD) (3,5). Thus, the identification of chronic CAD in patients with LBBB is important to stratify the risk and manage the therapy. Non-invasive stress tests have limited performance, and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) is usually required to confirm diagnosis (8–12).
Multislice computed tomography (MSCT) is a promising non-invasive technique to detect and characterize stenotic and non-stenotic plaque in CAD (13–23). The 64-slice computed tomography (CT) offers an improved spatial and temporal resolution (21–23). The aim of the present study was to evaluate in a routine clinical practice the diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice CT to identify CAD in patients with complete LBBB compared with CCA.
|
Methods
|
|---|
Patients.
From September 2004 to November 2005, 66 consecutive patients with complete LBBB, without a history of CAD, admitted for CCA in our institution were enrolled in the study. Multislice CT was performed 3 ± 3.9 days before angiogram. Exclusion criteria were suspicion of acute coronary syndrome, known history of CAD, arrhythmia, renal insufficiency (serum creatinine >150 µmol/l), iodine allergy, and pregnancy. All patients were in sinus rhythm and received oral beta-blocker medication if not contraindicated (metoprolol 100 mg, 1 h before acquisition) in order to lower heart rate below 70 beats/min. However, no patient was excluded due to a higher heart rate. Nitroglycerine was not used before CT acquisition. The local ethics committee approved the study, and a signed informed consent was obtained from all patients.
LBBB criteria.
Left bundle branch block was recorded on a 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) and defined as set by the Criteria Committee of the New York Heart Association (24): QRS interval  120 ms; slurred/notched wide and predominant R waves in leads I, aVL, V5, and V6; slurred/notched and broad S waves in V1 and V2 with absent or small R waves; mid-conduction delay defined as notching or a plateau in the mid-QRS wave; ventricular activation time >50 ms at the onset of the QRS interval; M-shaped QRS variants with occasionally wide R waves in V5 and V6; no initial Q-wave over the left precordium; and absence of pre-excitation.
Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).
Transthoracic echocardiography (Philips Sonos 7500, Amsterdam, the Netherlands) was performed with a multifrequency transducer and harmonic imaging as appropriate. Two-dimensional echocardiography was performed from the apical 4- and 2-chamber views. The LVEF was computed using biplane Simpson’s methodology (25).
MSCT technique.
All examinations were performed with a 64-slice CT (Sensation 64, Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The acquisition protocol included a gantry rotation time of 330 ms, a theoretical collimation of 0.4 mm (combining 64 x 0.6 mm slice collimation with the new z-sharp double sampling technology allowing dual focal spots per detector row) (26), and a table feed of 18 mm/s. The ECG was monitored during the scanning, and 70 to 90 ml of contrast medium were injected (flow rate 4 ml/s) (Iopamidol 400 mg/ml, Schering SA, Berlin, Germany). Acquisition started automatically at a threshold of 100 HU within the region of interest over the descending aorta. A tube voltage of 120 kV and a current of 600 mAs were applied with individual adaptation according to the patient’s morphology. The ECG-pulsed current modulation was activated. Dose-length product was obtained from the protocol that summarized each CT. The effective radiation dose was estimated by a method proposed by the European Working Group for Guidelines on Quality Criteria in CT as derived from the product of the dose-length product and a conversion coefficient for the chest as the investigated anatomic region (k = 0.017 mSv · mGy–1
· cm–1) averaged between male and female models (27). In our study, the estimated effective radiation was 7 ± 2 mSv.
Reconstruction process.
Transverse images were reconstructed retrospectively from the raw CT data and electrocardiographic tracings. The reconstruction was gated at –350 ms of RR interval for each cardiac cycle to generate diastolic phase cardiac images, using a slice thickness of 0.75 mm to minimize image noise and optimize signal-to-noise ratio and a reconstruction increment of 0.5 mm, with a smooth kernel (B30). The quality of image volumes was immediately judged in the frontal, axial, and sagittal plans. In cases of artifacts, additional sets of images were created for various points of the cardiac cycle, and the dataset with the minimum artifact was selected for further analysis.
Interpretation.
Multislice CT scans were analyzed by consensus of 2 examiners blinded to the results of CCA and all clinical information. Image quality was classified with a 5-point scale as: 5 = excellent (no motion artifacts present); 4 = good (minor motion artifact present); 3 = moderate (substantial motion artifacts present, but luminal assessment regarding significant stenosis still possible); 2 = heavily calcified (vessel lumen obscured by calcification); and 1 = blurred (only contrast visualization inside the vessel possible, no luminal assessment regarding significant stenosis possible) (15).
A previously described 15-segment American Heart Association model of the coronary tree was used (28). In case of a single lesion per segment, side branches or bifurcation were used as markers for the location. In case of multiple lesions per segment, the worst lesion was defined as eligible. Each lesion identified was examined using maximum intensity projection and multiplanar reconstruction techniques along longitudinal plane using the scanner standard workstation (Wizard, Siemens). Each lesion was examined by the minimal and normal adjacent lumen diameter seen in any view in the same segment. A significant stenosis was defined by visual estimation >50% on maximum intensity projection images for non-calcified lesions and on multiplanar reconstruction images for partially or heavily calcified lesions. Patients were considered as having a significant CAD in cases of at least 1 stenosis >50%.
CCA.
Selective coronary angiogram was performed by conventional technique, using 5-F catheters. Intracoronary injection of nitrates (1 mg of isosorbid dinitrate) was systematically used after identification of stenosis. The same 15-segment model employed for MSCT was used. Angiograms were reviewed by an experienced operator blinded to clinical and MSCT findings. Quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) was performed using the CAAS II algorithm (a second generation system for offline and online QCA) (29). A significant stenosis was defined as a mean diameter reduction >50% in 2 orthogonal views.
Statistics.
Effect of heart rate, LVEF, and body mass index on image quality was assessed by analysis of variance and procedure of least significant difference method Fisher test post-hoc analysis. The accuracy of MSCT to detect significant stenosis was compared with QCA as the standard of reference. Statistical analysis was performed with StatView 5.0 software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina). Percentages were expressed with a 95% confidence interval. Continuous variables were expressed as mean values ± SD and nominal variables as counts and percentages. A p value <0.05 was regarded as statistically significant.
|
Results
|
|---|
No patient was excluded from the study. Multislice CT was performed without complication in all patients. Ten patients (15%) were already under beta-blocker therapy, but additional treatment was needed in 56 patients (85%) before scanning. The mean heart rate during the scan was 67 ± 13 beats/min (range 46 to 119 beats/min). The total scan time was 12 ± 2 s. The clinical characteristics of the patients are summarized in Table 1.
Conventional coronary angiography revealed no significant stenosis in 37 patients (56%), 1-vessel disease in 14 patients (21%), 2-vessel disease in 4 patients (6%), and 3-vessel disease in 11 patients (17%). Five patients had significant left main stenosis.
Image quality.
Image quality score was good on average (3.8 ± 1.4) (Fig. 1). Score 5 (n = 32), 4 (n = 10), 3 (n = 6), 2 (n = 14), and 1 (n = 4) were for a heart rate of 60 ± 8, 67 ± 8, 71 ± 3, 72 ± 10, and 101 ± 13 beats/min, respectively. According to heart rate, image quality was significantly impaired among patients in score 1 and better among patients in score 5 when compared with patients in score 2, 3, and 4 (p < 0.05). All the patients with a heart rate >90/min presented blurred image quality (score 1). Four patients presented respiratory artifacts, 2 patients had an initial tachycardia during the scanning, and 8 patients had important diffuse calcifications impairing image quality to score 2. No relationship between image quality and LVEF or body mass index was noted.
Patient-based analysis.
Multislice CT correctly identified 35 of 37 (95%) patients without significant stenosis on CCA and 28 of 29 (97%) patients with significant stenosis on CCA (Table 2). One patient with a significant stenosis on the right posterior descending artery was classified as normal on MSCT. However, all 15 patients with multivessel disease were correctly detected by MSCT. Two patients without significant stenosis were classified as positive on MSCT regarding stenosis detected on mid-right coronary artery (RCA) and proximal left circumflex artery (LCX). Overall, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 64-slice CT for identifying patients with or without CAD was 95%, 97%, 95%, 93%, and 97%, respectively.
Lesion-by-lesion analysis.
Of 990 coronary segments, CCA detected 94 significant stenoses; MSCT correctly detected 68 (72%) (Table 2, Fig. 2). Multislice CT detected relatively less stenosis than CCA especially in multilesion patients. Twenty-six stenoses (28%) were missed or underestimated: 14 stenoses were missed because of motion artifacts (5) or important calcifications (9), and 12 lesions were underestimated. The distribution of missed lesions per vessel was as follows: left main, 0 of 5 (0%); left anterior descending artery (LAD), 5 of 42 (12%); LCX, 9 of 22 (41%); RCA, 12 of 25 (48%).
View larger version (58K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 2 Sixty-four-slice computed tomography in a 68-year-old man admitted for suspected coronary artery disease (A). Curved multiplanar reconstruction image of right coronary artery demonstrates significant stenosis on the proximal and distal portion (thick arrows) correctly assessed by coronary angiography (B). Note that 3 lesions were missed on side branches (thin arrows) (B). Ao = aorta; PLA = posterolateral artery; RPDA = right posterior descending artery.
|
|
Seven lesions were overestimated by MSCT because of motion artifacts (3) and important calcifications (4). Three of these lesions were on LCX and the 4 others on RCA.
On a per-artery analysis, MSCT had excellent specificity (99% to 100%), but sensitivity was, respectively, 100% for left main, 88% for LAD, and only 59% for LCX and 52% for RCA.
Overall, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 64-slice CT for detecting significant stenosis was 97%, 72%, 99%, 91%, and 97%, respectively.
|
Discussion
|
|---|
To our knowledge, this is the first study comparing MSCT and CCA in patients with LBBB. Our data demonstrates that 64-slice CT provides a high diagnostic accuracy to detect significant CAD if any, in patients with complete LBBB and sinus rhythm.
LBBB features.
The prevalence of complete LBBB increases from 1% at age 50 years to 17% at age 80 years in a general male population (1). In the onset of acute myocardial infarction, LBBB is related to ischemia in the distribution of LAD (30), but chronic block is a marker of a slowly progressing degenerative disease that also affects the myocardium (1). Currently, atherosclerotic CAD is associated in nearly one-half of patients with LBBB (3,5). Patients with LBBB are at increased risk of cardiac death (1–7), but the impact of CAD on mortality has yielded conflicting results. Previous studies found that LBBB is an independent predictor of mortality in chronic CAD (6,7) but was associated with more extensive CAD and worse left ventricular function (7). However, in other studies, the underlying cardiac pathology predicts the prognosis (3–5). The higher risk of sudden death is due to tachyarrhythmia and myocardial infarction (5), highlighting the importance of identifying CAD to stratify the risk and manage the therapy.
Non-invasive stress tests have limited performance to identify CAD in patients with complete LBBB (8–12). Exercise-induced ST-segment changes are non-specific for ischemia (8). Myocardial perfusion studies often suffer from false-positive anteroseptal or septal perfusion defects in the absence of LAD stenosis (9,11). Dobutamine stress echocardiography is a highly specific test (10,12), but sensitivity is moderate for septal ischemia in case of abnormal rest septal thickening (12). However, myocardial contrast echocardiography with adenosine seems to improve diagnostic accuracy (31). Finally, most studies excluded patients with a history of myocardial infarction or ventricular tachyarrhythmia or structural valve disease (10,12).
Conventional coronary angiography is usually required to confirm diagnosis of CAD in patients with complete LBBB. Cardiac catheterization is a relatively safe procedure but has a well-defined risk of morbidity (1.7%) and mortality (0.1%) (32).
Clinical implications.
In a routine clinical setting, including limitations of heart rate and calcifications, 64-slice CT correctly assessed 95% of patients with CAD (35 of 37) and identified all the patients (21 of 21) who needed revascularization. Regarding the false-negative patient, the missed lesion may be explained by the distal localization on side branch.
Furthermore, CCA could have been avoided in 57% of the cases (35 of 66 patients) with a negative predictive value of 97%. This high negative predictive value is comparable to that of other studies (13–15,17,21,23).
Lesion detection.
Complete visualization of all clinically important coronary segments is a prerequisite for MSCT coronary angiography to become an accepted clinical tool for the assessment of patients with suspected CAD (14). Our findings confirm the high diagnostic accuracy (97%) and specificity (99%) of 64-slice CT in detecting coronary stenosis. However, sensitivity was moderate (72%). Four hypotheses could explain such results.
Firstly, in our study all the segments were analyzed including distal and side branches with diameter <1.5 mm. Side branches were less accurate than in other localization (13 false negative [FN]/26; 7 lesions in obtuse marginal, 3 in right posterior descending artery, and 3 in posterolateral artery), possibly due to lower diameter and insufficient contrast opacification (23) (Fig. 2). These results are consistent with prior studies of 64-slice CT. Leber et al. (22) found a sensitivity of 75% without excluding small vessels. Raff et al. (21) found a sensitivity of 86% but failed to evaluate 12% of segments that were excluded. In contrast, Leschka et al. (23) found an excellent sensitivity of 94% with only 6% false-negative lesions (11 of 176). However, this discrepancy between our results could be explained by the high incidence of false-positive lesions: 14% (24 of 176) were overestimated versus 7% (7 of 94) in our study (23).
Secondly, heavily calcified segments led to 9 missed lesions (35% FN), 12 underestimated lesions (46% FN), and 4 overestimated lesions. Calcified plaque creates blooming artifacts and partial volume effects that blurred the delineation of the coronary lumen (14,16,17,21–23). Partial volume effect is due to averaging different densities within a single voxel, but this problem may be alleviated by decreasing voxel size or increasing spatial resolution (17,21). Currently, 64-slice CT with 0.4-mm z resolution remains highly accurate with moderate calcification, but segments with massive calcifications remain challenging to assess (21).
Thirdly, in our study exams with motion, artifacts were not excluded. When premature ventricular contraction or respiratory artifacts occurred, they rarely affected all the coronary segments: only 5 lesions were missed (19% FN) and 3 lesions were overestimated. The RCA (12 FN/26) and LCX (9 FN/26) were more commonly affected by missed lesion than LAD (5 FN/26) or left main artery (0 FN/26) probably due to curved anatomy of these arteries and their greater cardiac motion (14,17,23). Note that septal wall abnormalities usually observed in patients with LBBB hampered non-invasive stress tests and had no effect on the MSCT accuracy in analyzing the LAD segments (sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 88%, respectively).
Finally, in multilesion patients (but not necessarily multivessel patients), MSCT detected relatively less stenosis than CCA. This could be primarily explained due to the lack of sensitivity of MSCT for detecting side branch stenosis, and, secondly, multilesion analysis in clinical practice is time-consuming and should refer the patient for CCA for revascularization management.
Study limitations.
All our patients with LBBB were referred for catheterization, and CAD was identified in nearly one-half of our cohort. This could have influenced MSCT sensitivity, but this high prevalence of CAD in this population is consistent with previous studies (3,5).
The need for beta-blocker therapy to reduce heart rate in our experience is still recommended.
Previous studies showed high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of CAD when restricting analysis to patients with a low calcium scoring (15,21). The coronary calcification score has been shown to correlate strongly with the presence and severity of coronary atherosclerosis (33). However, the lack of specificity of this score (34) partially explained why this score was not assessed in our high-risk population.
In our study, no segment was excluded, but in a clinical screening practice, heavy calcifications or motion artifacts blurring the luminal assessment in some non-interpretable segments should cause the patient to be referred for cardiac catheterization.
Radiation exposure of MSCT remains a matter of concern. However, we have systematically used the ECG-pulsed current modulation to reduce radiation dose during systole (35). We have also applied individual adaptation according to the patient’s morphology. Thus, in our study, the estimated effective radiation (7 ± 2 mSv) was 30% to 50% lower than that reported in previous studies with 64-slice CT (21,22). Our data are consistent with that of Hausleiter et al. (36) who found 5.4 ± 1.1 mSv when low tube voltage and ECG-dependent dose modulation were applied with 64-slice CT.
Conclusions.
In a routine clinical practice, 64-slice CT detects with excellent accuracy a significant CAD in patients with complete LBBB. A normal MSCT in this clinical setting is a robust tool to act as a filter and avoid invasive diagnostic procedures. Severe calcifications and cardiac rhythm remain common limitations. Sixty-four-slice CT may be proposed as an alternative method to stress tests in screening patients with LBBB.
|
References
|
|---|
1. Eriksson P, Hansson PO, Eriksson H, Dellborg M. Bundle-branch block in a general male population: the study of men born 1913 Circulation 1998;98:2494-2500.[Abstract/Free Full Text]2. Eriksson P, Wilhelmsen L, Rosengren A. Bundle-branch block in middle-aged men: risk of complications and death over 28 yearsThe Primary Prevention Study in Goteborg, Sweden. Eur Heart J 2005;26:2300-2306.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 3. Schneider JF, Thomas Jr HE, Sorlie P, Kreger BE, McNamara PM, Kannel WB. Comparative features of newly acquired left and right bundle branch block in the general population: the Framingham study Am J Cardiol 1981;47:931-940.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 4. Rotman M, Triebwasser JH. A clinical and follow-up study of right and left bundle branch block Circulation 1975;51:477-484.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 5. McAnulty JH, Rahimtoola SH, Murphy E, et al. Natural history of "high-risk" bundle-branch block: final report of a prospective study N Engl J Med 1982;307:137-143.[Abstract] 6. Hesse B, Diaz LA, Snader CE, Blackstone EH, Lauer MS. Complete bundle branch block as an independent predictor of all-cause mortality: report of 7,073 patients referred for nuclear exercise testing Am J Med 2001;110:253-259.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 7. Freedman RA, Alderman EL, Sheffield LT, Saporito M, Fisher LD. Bundle branch block in patients with chronic coronary artery disease: angiographic correlates and prognostic significance J Am Coll Cardiol 1987;10:73-80.[Abstract] 8. Orzan F, Garcia E, Mathur VS, Hall RJ. Is the treadmill exercise test useful for evaluating coronary artery disease in patients with complete left bundle branch block? Am J Cardiol 1978;42:36-40.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 9. DePuey EG, Guertler-Krawczynska E, Robbins WL. Thallium-201 SPECT in coronary artery disease patients with left bundle branch block J Nucl Med 1988;29:1479-1485.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 10. Duncan AM, Francis DP, Gibson DG, Henein MY. Differentiation of ischemic from nonischemic cardiomyopathy during dobutamine stress by left ventricular long-axis function: additional effect of left bundle-branch block Circulation 2003;108:1214-1220.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 11. Lebtahi NE, Stauffer JC, Delaloye AB. Left bundle branch block and coronary artery disease: accuracy of dipyridamole thallium-201 single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with exercise anteroseptal perfusion defects J Nucl Cardiol 1997;4:266-273.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 12. Geleijnse ML, Vigna C, Kasprzak JD, et al. Usefulness and limitations of dobutamine-atropine stress echocardiography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with left bundle branch blockA multicentre study. Eur Heart J 2000;21:1666-1673.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 13. 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.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 14. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Nieman K, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:2265-2270.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 15. Kuettner A, Trabold T, Schroeder S, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary lesions using 16-detector multislice spiral computed tomography technology: initial clinical results J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1230-1237.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 16. Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Manzke R, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 16-detector row CT: effect of heart rate Radiology 2005;234:86-97.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 17. Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Schmitz BL, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography JAMA 2005;293:2471-2478.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 18. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Hoffmann U, et al. Assessment of coronary remodeling in stenotic and nonstenotic coronary atherosclerotic lesions by multidetector spiral computed tomography J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:842-847.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 19. Caussin C, Ohanessian A, Ghostine S, et al. Characterization of vulnerable nonstenotic plaque with 16-slice computed tomography compared with intravascular ultrasound Am J Cardiol 2004;94:99-104.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 20. Haberl R, Tittus J, Bohme E, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomographic angiography of coronary arteries in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: an effective filter before catheter angiography? Am Heart J 2005;149:1112-1119.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 21. 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.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 22. Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:147-154.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 23. Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience Eur Heart J 2005;26:1482-1487.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 24. Criteria Committee of the New York Heart Association Nomenclature and Criteria for Diagnosis of Diseases of the Heart and Great Vessels. 9th ed.. Boston, MA: Little, Brown; 1994. pp. 210-219. 25. Schiller NB, Shah PM, Crawford M, et al. Recommendations for quantitation of the left ventricle by two-dimensional echocardiographyAmerican Society of Echocardiography Committee on Standards, Subcommittee on Quantitation of Two-Dimensional Echocardiograms. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1989;2:358-367.[Medline] 26. Flohr T, Stierstorfer K, Raupach R, Ulzheimer S, Bruder H. Performance evaluation of a 64-slice CT system with z-flying focal spot Rofo 2004;176:1803-1810.[Web of Science][Medline] 27. In: Menzel HG, Teunen D, editors. European Guidelines on Quality Criteria for Computed Tomography. Luxembourg: European Commission; 2000Publication N°. EUR 16262 EN. 28. Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL, et al. A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery diseaseReport of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 1975;51:5-40.[Medline] 29. Gronenschild E, Janssen J, Tijdens F. CAASII: A second generation system for off-line and on-line quantitative coronary angiography. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1994;33:61-75.[Web of Science][Medline] 30. Lev M, Kinare SG, Pick A. The pathogenesis of atrioventricular block in coronary disease Circulation 1970;42:409-425.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 31. Karavidas AI, Matsakas EP, Lazaros GA, et al. Comparison of myocardial contrast echocardiography with SPECT in the evaluation of coronary artery disease in asymptomatic patients with LBBB Int J Cardiol 2006;112:334-340.[CrossRef][Medline] 32. Bashore TM, Bates ER, Berger PB, et al. American College of Cardiology/Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory StandardsA report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:2170-2214.[Free Full Text] 33. Rumberger JA, Behrenbeck T, Breen JF, Sheedy 2nd PF. Coronary calcification by electron beam computed tomography and obstructive coronary artery disease: a model for costs and effectiveness of diagnosis as compared with conventional cardiac testing methods J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:453-462.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 34. Elkeles RS, Dunlop A, Thompson GR, et al. Coronary calcification and predicted risk of coronary heart disease in asymptomatic men with hypercholesterolaemia J Cardiovasc Risk 2002;9:349-353.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 35. Jakobs TF, Becker CR, Ohnesorge B, et al. Multislice helical CT of the heart with retrospective ECG gating: reduction of radiation exposure by ECG-controlled tube current modulation Eur Radiol 2002;12:1081-1086.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 36. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates Circulation 2006;113:1305-1310.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Related Article
-
Detecting Coronary Artery Disease in Left Bundle Branch Block
- Ami E. Iskandrian
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2006 48: 1935-1937.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
S. Achenbach, M. Marwan, D. Ropers, T. Schepis, T. Pflederer, K. Anders, A. Kuettner, W. G. Daniel, M. Uder, and M. M. Lell
Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 mSv using prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition
Eur. Heart J.,
November 5, 2009;
(2009)
ehp470v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Andreini, G. Pontone, A. L. Bartorelli, P. Agostoni, S. Mushtaq, E. Bertella, D. Trabattoni, G. Cattadori, S. Cortinovis, A. Annoni, et al.
Sixty-Four-Slice Multidetector Computed Tomography: An Accurate Imaging Modality for the Evaluation of Coronary Arteries in Dilated Cardiomyopathy of Unknown Etiology
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging,
May 1, 2009;
2(3):
199 - 205.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. B. Meijer, Y. L. O, J. Geleijns, and L. J. M. Kroft
Meta-Analysis of 40- and 64-MDCT Angiography for Assessing Coronary Artery Stenosis
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
December 1, 2008;
191(6):
1667 - 1675.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G Mowatt, J A Cook, G S Hillis, S Walker, C Fraser, X Jia, and N Waugh
64-Slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis
Heart,
November 1, 2008;
94(11):
1386 - 1393.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Ghostine, C. Caussin, M. Habis, Y. Habib, C. Clement, A. Sigal-Cinqualbre, C.-Y. Angel, B. Lancelin, A. Capderou, and J.-F. Paul
Non-invasive diagnosis of ischaemic heart failure using 64-slice computed tomography
Eur. Heart J.,
September 1, 2008;
29(17):
2133 - 2140.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Kantor, N. S. Anavekar, and T. C. Gerber
Good news on coronary computed tomographic angiography: answers that have questions!
Eur. Heart J.,
September 1, 2008;
29(17):
2070 - 2072.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M. Kramer
All High-Risk Patients Should Not Be Screened With Computed Tomographic Angiography
Circulation,
March 11, 2008;
117(10):
1333 - 1339.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Achenbach, U. Ropers, A. Kuettner, K. Anders, T. Pflederer, S. Komatsu, W. Bautz, W. G. Daniel, and D. Ropers
Randomized comparison of 64-slice single- and dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography for the detection of coronary artery disease.
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img.,
March 1, 2008;
1(2):
177 - 186.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Schroeder, S. Achenbach, F. Bengel, C. Burgstahler, F. Cademartiri, P. de Feyter, R. George, P. Kaufmann, A. F. Kopp, J. Knuuti, et al.
Cardiac computed tomography: indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements: Report of a Writing Group deployed by the Working Group Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology
Eur. Heart J.,
February 2, 2008;
29(4):
531 - 556.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Abdulla, S. Z. Abildstrom, O. Gotzsche, E. Christensen, L. Kober, and C. Torp-Pedersen
64-multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Eur. Heart J.,
December 2, 2007;
28(24):
3042 - 3050.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J. Einstein, K. W. Moser, R. C. Thompson, M. D. Cerqueira, and M. J. Henzlova
Radiation Dose to Patients From Cardiac Diagnostic Imaging
Circulation,
September 11, 2007;
116(11):
1290 - 1305.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. J. Gibbons, P. A. Araoz, and E. E. Williamson
The Year in Cardiac Imaging
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
September 4, 2007;
50(10):
988 - 1003.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A.C. Lima and J. Hare
Visualizing the Coronaries in Patients Presenting With Heart Failure of Unknown Etiology
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
May 22, 2007;
49(20):
2051 - 2052.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. L. Raff and J. A. Goldstein
Coronary Angiography by Computed Tomography: Coronary Imaging Evolves
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
May 8, 2007;
49(18):
1830 - 1833.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. N. DeMaria, O. Ben-Yehuda, G. K. Feld, G. S. Ginsburg, B. H. Greenberg, W. Y.W. Lew, J. A.C. Lima, A. S. Maisel, J. Narula, D. J. Sahn, et al.
Highlights of the Year in JACC 2006
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
January 30, 2007;
49(4):
509 - 527.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
Top
Abstract
Methods