EXPEDITED REVIEW
Noncardiac Findings in Cardiac Imaging With Multidetector Computed Tomography
Yoshinobu Onuma, MD*,
Kengo Tanabe, MD, PhD*,*,
Gaku Nakazawa, MD*,
Jiro Aoki, MD*,
Hiroyoshi Nakajima, MD, PhD*,
Kenji Ibukuro, MD and
Kazuhiro Hara, MD, FACC*
* Division of Cardiology, Mitsui Memorial Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
Division of Radiology, Mitsui Memorial Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
Manuscript received October 19, 2005;
revised manuscript received March 6, 2006,
accepted April 4, 2006.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Kengo Tanabe, Division of Cardiology, Mitsui Memorial Hospital, 1, Kanda-Izumi-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
(Email: kengo-t{at}zd5.so-net.ne.jp).
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
OBJECTIVES: We investigated the frequency of the noncardiac findings in cardiac imaging with multidetector computed tomography (MDCT).
BACKGROUND: Multidetector computed tomography is an accepted new tool to evaluate the heart. In cardiac MDCT scans, organs other than the heart are also irradiated, but usually not assessed.
METHODS: A total of 503 patients underwent cardiac imaging with 16- or 64-slice MDCT. Cardiologists assessed the heart, while radiologists reviewed the other organs.
RESULTS: A total of 346 new, noncardiac findings were identified in 292 patients (58.1%). A total of 114 patients (22.7%) had clinically significant findings including 4 cases of malignancy (0.8%).
CONCLUSIONS: There were a significant number of noncardiac findings in cardiac MDCT. To avoid missing clinically important findings, physicians who analyze cardiac MDCT scan—either radiologists or cardiologists—should carefully evaluate all the organs irradiated in the scan.
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | CT = computed tomography | | EBCT = electron-beam computed tomography | | FOV = field of view | | MDCT = multidetector computed tomography |
|
Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) with high temporal and spatial resolution is emerging as a noninvasive diagnostic technique to visualize the heart. It is now accepted as a useful modality to detect coronary stenoses (1–10) and coronary plaques (11), to assess calcification of the coronary arteries (12), remodeling of coronary atherosclerotic lesions (13), anatomy of the pericardium (14), and size and function of the ventricles (15,16). Because of the growing number of scanners, these examinations will beperformed with increasing frequency. This versatile modality is expected to diagnose not only coronary artery disease but also other diseases causing chest pain such as aortic dissection (17,18) and pulmonary embolism (19,20). As all chest organs including portions of the great vessels, lungs, chest wall, spine, liver, and gall bladder are also irradiated during the cardiac MDCT scans, noncardiac diseases unrelated to chest symptoms might be detected. However, the incidence of abnormal findings in these organs in cardiac MDCT has not been fully investigated.
We examined the frequency of noncardiac findings in a series of patients undergoing cardiac MDCT. As to the patients with significant noncardiac findings, we reviewed how these findings were followed up in the 6 months after cardiac MDCT.
|
Methods
|
|---|
The study group consisted of 503 consecutive patients with suspected coronary artery disease who underwent diagnostic cardiac MDCT between July 1, 2004, and July 14, 2005, at a single center.
Data acquisition.
Multidetector computed tomography data were acquired with a 16-slice MDCT scanner (SOMATOM Sensation Cardiac 16, Siemens, Forchheim, Germany) between July 2004 and November 2004 and a 64-slice MDCT scanner (SOMATOM Sensation Cardiac 64, Siemens) between November 2004 and July 2005.
Patients were scanned in the supine position from the level of the pulmonary arteries through the base of the heart. Patients with a history of coronary artery bypass graft (internal mammary artery or gastroepiploic artery) were scanned widely from the level of the subclavian arteries through the level of the celiac trunk. According to previous reports (4,10), we performed a non-enhanced scan primarily for calcium scoring and an enhanced scan for MDCT angiogram. A contrast-enhanced scan was obtained using 60 to 100 ml of contrast injected through the antecubital vein at 4.5 ml/s, followed by a 30-ml saline chaser. The scan parameters in the 16-MDCT scanner were: 16 x 0.75 mm collimation; rotation time 370 ms, table feed 3.0 mm/rotation; tube voltage 120 mV; effective mA 550. The scan parameters in the 64-MDCT scanner were: 32 x 0.6 mm collimation; rotation time 330 ms, table feed 3.8 mm/rotation; tube voltage 120 mV; effective mA 770. Enhanced datasets were reconstructed for assessment of coronary stenosis at –320 to –420 ms before the R-wave, and adjusted individually so that the end of the reconstruction period was positioned at the peak of the P-wave on the electrocardiogram (21).
One dataset was reconstructed with a small field of view (FOV) tightly confined around the heart. A second dataset was reconstructed with a large FOV to include the entire chest in each cross section with a slice thickness of 5 mm.
Analysis.
All scans were at first analyzed by 3 cardiologists. Images with a large FOV were reviewed by 4 experienced radiologists in standard mediastinal windows (350 W/50C) and lung windows (1,400 W/–600C). All abnormalities and patients with significant abnormal findings were identified. The number of new noncardiac findings in each organ was counted, and significant findings were defined as abnormalities that required additional follow-up or further investigation. Medical records were reviewed to check the clinical follow-up, subsequent imagings, or surgical procedures of noncardiac abnormalities in the 6 months after cardiac MDCT.
|
Results
|
|---|
Clinical characteristics of the patients are summarized in Table 1. There was no evidence of acute coronary syndrome. A total of 420 patients (83.5%) were symptomatic. Sixty-five patients (12.9%) were current smokers, and 197 patients (39.2%) were former smokers.
In the cardiac analysis, 238 patients (47.3%) had a positive result for cardiac disease. In the noncardiac analysis, a total of 346 noncardiac findings were identified in 292 (58.1%) of 503 patients. Table 2 presents the organs and structures with noncardiac findings. Of 420 symptomatic patients, cardiac disease was detected in 219 patients. Of the remaining 201 patients, 32 patients were diagnosed with noncardiac findings, which could be the cause of symptoms.
A total of 114 patients (22.7%) had significant noncardiac pathology requiring clinical or radiological follow-up. Seventy-five patients underwent further imaging or investigations, and 18 patients had therapeutic consequences during 6 months of follow-up. Table 3 shows the number of patients with diagnostic and therapeutic consequences. Of the other 39 patients, 26 patients were followed without any imaging workup. Follow-up information could not be obtained from outside hospitals in 12 patients. One patient died from brain hemorrhage, which was unrelated to the noncardiac findings.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Consequences in the Patients With Significant Noncardiac Findings During the 6 Months After the MDCT Scan
|
|
Imaging workup included 24 computed tomography (CT) scans, 2 magnetic resonance imaging examinations, 2 mammograms, 3 sonograms, and 43 conventional radiographs. The time between cardiac MDCT and follow-up imaging studies ranged from 1 to 178 days.
Malignancies were revealed in 4 patients (0.80%). Two were found to have adenocarcinoma of the lung (Fig. 1). Both patients were treated surgically. The other 2 patients had malignancy of the breast. One was diagnosed as intraductal carcinoma of the breast (Fig. 2) and surgically treated. The other proved to be angiosarcoma, and the patient died from repetitive hemorrhage of the malignancy.
View larger version (141K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1 The arrow indicates a nodule in the right lung of a 75-year-old woman with suspected coronary artery disease who underwent a 64-slice multidetector computed tomography scan. The nodule was pathologically proved to be adenocarcinoma.
|
|
View larger version (94K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2 The arrow indicates a nodule in the left breast of a 62-year-old woman who underwent a 16-slice multidetector computed tomography scan. The nodule was surgically resected and proved to be intraductal carcinoma.
|
|
|
Discussion
|
|---|
In this study, we found that 58.1% of the patients referred for cardiac MDCT scan had noncardiac findings, 22.7% of the patients were found to have significant noncardiac pathology requiring additional work-up, and 3.6% had therapeutic consequences. During 6 months of clinical follow-up, 4 cases of malignant disease were revealed.
Routine cardiac MDCT is performed by scanning the heart from bifurcation of the pulmonary artery to the left ventricular apex with or without a non-enhanced scan for assessment of calcification. Consequently, images are reconstructed to focus on the heart in synchronization with the diastolic phase. In the process, we can freely adjust the FOV—the area in which a raster with a predefined number of pixels is arranged from the raw data—without additional radiation exposure, because the entire content within the boundaries of the gantry is scanned and available. For cardiac imaging, FOV was confined to be as small as possible to achieve best resolution and ranged from 16 to 25 cm2. These images included little of the lung or the other chest organs, although all chest organs were irradiated.
Besides images for cardiac analysis, we made another set of images with a large FOV to evaluate the peripheral chest. This method is not universal, but we think it could be beneficial to evaluate all organs irradiated in the scan. For patients with chest symptoms, pleural or aortic diseases could be differentiated in the same scan. Of 201 symptomatic patients in whom coronary artery disease was ruled out, 32 patients were diagnosed to have noncardiac findings, which could cause anginal symptoms. In these patients, further diagnostic imaging workup was not necessary. In addition, asymptomatic malignancies could be detected. In this study, 3 cases of malignancies were revealed in an asymptomatic and surgically treatable stage. If the peripheral chest had not been properly evaluated in cardiac MDCT, they may have been diagnosed at a later stage. Evaluating noncardiac findings may be important to prevent significant morbidity and mortality.
There are no published data on the prevalence of noncardiac abnormalities in cardiac MDCT studies, although several studies of electron-beam computed tomography (EBCT) cardiac scans have been published (22,23). Hunold et al. (23) investigated 1,812 patients undergoing EBCT and demonstrated about the same frequency of noncardiac findings (53%) as the present study (58%). In a study by Horton et al. (22), of 1,326 consecutive patients with EBCT, significant noncardiac findings that required clinical or radiological follow-up were observed in 7.8%. In contrast, the present study identified significant noncardiac findings in 22.7%, in which pulmonary nodules and aortic disease were observed more frequently. The higher incidence of pulmonary nodules in our cohort is partly related to a larger number of former or current smokers. Fifty-two percent of the patients were former or current smokers in our study, while only 25% were former or current smokers in the study by Horton et al. (22). The risk of coronary artery disease decreases promptly after smoking cessation (24), while the risk of lung carcinoma does not. The incidence of lung cancer correlates with the amount of cigarettes smoked (25). Therefore, our cohorts were considered to be at a higher risk of lung carcinoma. Contrast enhancement may have contributed to frequent detection of aortic disease in our study, while Horton et al. (22) performed EBCT scans without contrast. Furthermore, the high resolution of MDCT may allow accurate interpretation of pathology in the other chest organs.
Our study detected 2 cases of lung cancer (0.4%) with 6 months of follow-up. In studies of CT screening for lung cancer, frequency of noncalcified nodules in baseline screening ranges from 12% to 46%, that of lung cancer ranges from 0.4% to 2.7% (26–31). Nawa et al. (28) reported that 0.44% of the patients undergoing low-dose spiral CT scan demonstrated lung cancer and that 26.8% had non-calcified pulmonary nodules in a population quite similar to ours. The population of that study included 62% who were former or current smokers, while our population included 53%. The prevalence of lung cancer in that study (0.44%) was the same as in our study (0.4%).
The limitations of our study are as follows. First, the time of clinical follow-up was relatively short. For example, the only way to make certain that a pulmonary nodule is benign is to follow it up to demonstrate stability over years unless it is surgically resected. We might have underestimated the significance of the noncardiac findings. Second, a cost/efficacy analysis was not performed in the present study. A prospective, controlled study is necessary to elucidate cost/efficacy of evaluating noncardiac findings in cardiac MDCT.
In conclusion, a number of clinically significant noncardiac findings might have been missed in conventional cardiac MDCT scans. Although a small percent of the findings resulted in therapeutic consequences, some were important, including asymptomatic malignancies. Cardiologists are familiar with anatomy of the heart but are usually not trained to perform radiological diagnosis of the other thoracic organs. For a cardiologist analyzing cardiac MDCT scans, it is essential to collaborate with radiologists to avoid missing significant findings. Physicians who analyze cardiac MDCT scans—either radiologists or cardiologists—should carefully evaluate all the organs in the scan.
|
References
|
|---|
1. 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]2. Ropers D, Baum U, Pohle K, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses with thin-slice multi-detector row spiral computed tomography and multiplanar reconstruction Circulation 2003;107:664-666.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 3. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Cury RC, et al. 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.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 4. Kuettner A, Kopp AF, Schroeder S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with angiographically proven coronary artery disease J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:831-839.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 5. Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D'Eliseo A, et al. Accuracy of thin-slice computed tomography in the detection of coronary stenoses Eur Heart J 2004;25:1043-1048.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 6. 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] 7. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Pohle FK, et al. 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.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 8. 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] 9. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Krestin GP, et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy with 16-row multi-slice computed tomography coronary angiography J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:128-132.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 10. 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] 11. Achenbach S, Moselewski F, Ropers D, 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;109:14-17.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 12. Stanford W, Thompson BH, Burns TL, Heery SD, Burr MC. Coronary artery calcium quantification at multi-detector row helical CT versus electron-beam CT Radiology 2004;230:397-402.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 13. 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] 14. Truong MT, Erasmus JJ, Gladish GW, et al. Anatomy of pericardial recesses on multidetector CT: implications for oncologic imaging AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1109-1113.[Free Full Text] 15. Lessick J, Mutlak D, Rispler S, et al. Comparison of multidetector computed tomography versus echocardiography for assessing regional left ventricular function Am J Cardiol 2005;96:1011-1015.[CrossRef][Medline] 16. Raman SV, Cook SC, McCarthy B, Ferketich AK. Usefulness of multidetector row computed tomography to quantify right ventricular size and function in adults with either tetralogy of Fallot or transposition of the great arteries Am J Cardiol 2005;95:683-686.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 17. Hofmann LK, Zou KH, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. Electrocardiographically gated 16-section CT of the thorax: cardiac motion suppression Radiology 2004;233:927-933.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 18. Manghat NE, Morgan-Hughes GJ, Roobottom CA. Multi-detector row computed tomography: imaging in acute aortic syndrome Clin Radiol 2005;60:1256-1267.[CrossRef][Medline] 19. Perrier A, Roy PM, Sanchez O, et al. Multidetector-row computed tomography in suspected pulmonary embolism N Engl J Med 2005;352:1760-1768.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 20. Schoepf UJ, Goldhaber SZ, Costello P. Spiral computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism Circulation 2004;109:2160-2167.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 21. Sato Y, Matsumoto N, Kato M, et al. Noninvasive assessment of coronary artery disease by multislice spiral computed tomography using a new retrospectively ECG-gated image reconstruction technique Circ J 2003;67:401-405.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 22. Horton KM, Post WS, Blumenthal RS, Fishman EK. Prevalence of significant noncardiac findings on electron-beam computed tomography coronary artery calcium screening examinations Circulation 2002;106:532-534.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 23. Hunold P, Schmermund A, Seibel RM, Gronemeyer DH, Erbel R. Prevalence and clinical significance of accidental findings in electron-beam tomographic scans for coronary artery calcification Eur Heart J 2001;22:1748-1758.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 24. Enstrom JE, Heath Jr CW. Smoking cessation and mortality trends among 118,000 Californians, 1960–1997 Epidemiology 1999;10:500-512.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 25. Wynder EL, Graham EA. Tobacco smoking as a possible etiologic factor in bronchiogenic carcinoma; a study of 684 proved cases JAMA 1950;143:329-336.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 26. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening Lancet 1999;354:99-105.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 27. Henschke CI, Naidich DP, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early lung cancer action project: initial findings on repeat screenings Cancer 2001;92:153-159.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 28. Nawa T, Nakagawa T, Kusano S, Kawasaki Y, Sugawara Y, Nakata H. Lung cancer screening using low-dose spiral CT: results of baseline and 1-year follow-up studies Chest 2002;122:15-20.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 29. Pastorino U, Bellomi M, Landoni C, et al. Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year results Lancet 2003;362:593-597.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 30. Sobue T, Moriyama N, Kaneko M, et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose helical computed tomography: anti-lung cancer association project J Clin Oncol 2002;20:911-920.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 31. Swensen SJ, Jett JR, Hartman TE, et al. Lung cancer screening with CT: Mayo Clinic experience Radiology 2003;226:756-761.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
J. MacHaalany, Y. Yam, T. D. Ruddy, A. Abraham, L. Chen, R. S. Beanlands, and B. J.W. Chow
Potential clinical and economic consequences of noncardiac incidental findings on cardiac computed tomography.
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
October 13, 2009;
54(16):
1533 - 1541.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. A. Hlatky and C. Iribarren
The dilemma of incidental findings on cardiac computed tomography.
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
October 13, 2009;
54(16):
1542 - 1543.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Leipsic, D. Wood, D. Manders, F. Nietlispach, J. B. Masson, J. Mayo, S. Al-Bugami, and J. G. Webb
The Evolving Role of MDCT in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Radiologists' Perspective
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
September 1, 2009;
193(3):
W214 - W219.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. G. Chan, M. P. Smith, T. H. Hauser, S. B. Yeon, E. Appelbaum, N. M. Rofsky, and W. J. Manning
Noncardiac Pathology on Clinical Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img.,
August 1, 2009;
2(8):
980 - 986.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Wiant, E. Nyberg, and R. C. Gilkeson
CT Evaluation of Congenital Heart Disease in Adults
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
August 1, 2009;
193(2):
388 - 396.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Sundaram, S. Patel, P. Agarwal, and E. A. Kazerooni
Anatomy and Terminology for the Interpretation and Reporting of Cardiac MDCT: Part 2, CT Angiography, Cardiac Function Assessment, and Noncoronary and Extracardiac Findings
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
March 1, 2009;
192(3):
584 - 598.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. J. Francois, D. Tuite, V. Deshpande, R. Jerecic, P. Weale, and J. C. Carr
Pulmonary Vein Imaging with Unenhanced Three-dimensional Balanced Steady-State Free Precession MR Angiography: Initial Clinical Evaluation
Radiology,
March 1, 2009;
250(3):
932 - 939.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. Pickhardt, M. E. Hanson, D. J. Vanness, J. Y. Lo, D. H. Kim, A. J. Taylor, T. C. Winter, and J. L. Hinshaw
Unsuspected Extracolonic Findings at Screening CT Colonography: Clinical and Economic Impact
Radiology,
October 1, 2008;
249(1):
151 - 159.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. S. Douglas, M. Cerqueria, G. D. Rubin, and A. S.-L. Chin
Extracardiac findings: what is a cardiologist to do?
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img.,
September 1, 2008;
1(5):
682 - 687.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Northam, J. Koonce, and J. G. Ravenel
Pulmonary Nodules Detected at Cardiac CT: Comparison of Images in Limited and Full Fields of View
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
September 1, 2008;
191(3):
878 - 881.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. M. Colletti
Incidental Findings on Cardiac Imaging
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
September 1, 2008;
191(3):
882 - 884.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. M. Takakuwa and E. J. Halpern
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,
August 1, 2008;
248(2):
438 - 446.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. K. Buck, S. Nekolla, S. Ziegler, A. Beer, B. J. Krause, K. Herrmann, K. Scheidhauer, H.-J. Wester, E. J. Rummeny, M. Schwaiger, et al.
SPECT/CT
J. Nucl. Med.,
August 1, 2008;
49(8):
1305 - 1319.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
W T Roberts, J J Bax, and L C Davies
Cardiac CT and CT coronary angiography: technology and application
Heart,
June 1, 2008;
94(6):
781 - 792.
[Abstract]
[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. Mueller, J. Jeudy, R. Poston, and C. S. White
Cardiac CT Angiography After Coronary Bypass Surgery: Prevalence of Incidental Findings
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
August 1, 2007;
189(2):
414 - 419.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Fleet
Noncardiac Findings in Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
March 20, 2007;
49(11):
1227 - 1228.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Rumberger
Reply
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
March 20, 2007;
49(11):
1228 - 1228.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Onuma, K. Tanabe, and K. Hara
Reply
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
March 20, 2007;
49(11):
1228 - 1229.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. de Feyter and N. van Pelt
Spiral Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography: A New Diagnostic Tool Developing Its Role in Clinical Cardiology
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
February 27, 2007;
49(8):
872 - 874.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Rumberger
Noncardiac Abnormalities in Diagnostic Cardiac Computed Tomography: Within Normal Limits or We Never Looked!
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
July 18, 2006;
48(2):
407 - 408.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
Top
Abstract
Methods