대한영상의학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology)

  • 제65권3호
  • /
  • Pages.303-315
  • /
  • 2011
  • /
  • 1738-2637(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-2928(eISSN)
대한영상의학회 (The Korean Society of Radiology)
권호 표지

대한심장혈관영상의학회 심장 CT 권고안

Korean Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Guidelines for Cardiac Computed Tomography

  • 김영진 (대한심장혈관영상의학회 심장혈관영상 권고안위원회) ;
  • 용환석 (대한심장혈관영상의학회 심장혈관영상 권고안위원회) ;
  • 최병욱 (대한심장혈관영상의학회 심장혈관영상 권고안위원회) ;
  • 김양민 (세종병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 최연현 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 영상의학과학교실) ;
  • 임태환 (울산대학교 의과대학 서울아산병원 영상의학과학교실) ;
  • 박재형 (서울대학교병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 최규옥 (연세대학교 의과대학 세브란스병원 영상의학과학교실)
  • Kim, Young-Jin (Korean Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Guidelines Committee) ;
  • Yong, Hwan-Seok (Korean Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Guidelines Committee) ;
  • Choi, Byoung-Wook (Korean Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Guidelines Committee) ;
  • Kim, Yang-Min (Department of Radiology, Sejong Hospital and Sejong Heart Institute) ;
  • Choe, Yeon-Hyeon (Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center) ;
  • Lim, Tae-Hwan (Department of Radiology, Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Park, Jae-Hyung (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Choe, Kyu-Ok (Department of Radiology, Yonsei University Health System)
  • 발행 : 2011.09.01
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

대한심장혈관영상의학회는 심장 CT 촬영에 대한 적정한 영상의학수준을 제공하여 심장 CT를 이용하는 의사와 환자에게 도움을 주고자 심장 CT에 대한 권고안을 마련하였다. 근거중심의학에 기초한 권고안 마련을 위하여 국내 병 의원에 대한 설문조사와 국내외의 문헌조사, 그리고 전문가들의 의견을 참고하였다. 이 권고안과 다르다고 해서 일반적인 영상의학 수준보다 못하다는 의미는 아니며, 임상 및 영상의학과 의사는 환자의 상태나 임상적 필요성 등 납득할 만한 이유가 있을 경우 이 권고안과 다른 합리적 결정을 할 수 있다. 이 권고안은 기술의 발전과 의료환경의 변화에 따라 계속 수정되어야 한다. 이 권고안은 의료제공의 법적인 기준을 정하고자 하는 것이 아니며 대한심장혈관영상의학회는 의료행위 또는 임상적인 판단에 대한 법적인 소송에 이 권고안이 사용되는 것은 반대한다. 이 권고안의 목적은 심장 CT를 시행하고 관리하는 임상 및 영상의학과 의사와 관련된 의료종사자에게 성인의 심장 CT에서 표준화된 영상기법을 제공하기 위한 것이다.

The Korean Society of Cardiovascular Imaging (KOCSI) has issued a guideline for the use of cardiac CT imaging in order to assist clinicians and patients in providing adequate level of medical service. In order to establish a guideline founded on evidence based medicine, it was designed based on comprehensive data such as questionnaires conducted in international and domestic hospitals, intensive journal reviews, and with experts in cardiac radiology. The recommendations of this guideline should not be used as an absolute standard and medical professionals can always refer to methods non-adherent to this guideline when it is considered more reasonable and beneficial to an individual patient's medical situation. The guideline has its limitation and should be revised appropriately with the advancement medical equipment technology and public health care system. The guideline should not be served as a measure for standard of care. KOCSI strongly disapproves the use of the guideline to be used as the standard of expected practice in medical litigation processes.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Kerl JM, Ravenel JG, Nguyen SA, Suranyi P, Thilo C, Costello P, et al. Right heart: split-bolus injection of diluted contrast medium for visualization at coronary CT angiography. Radiology 2008;247:356-364 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2472070856
  2. Jacobs JE, Boxt LM, Desjardins B, Fishman EK, Larson PA, Schoepf J; American College of Radiology. ACR practice guideline for the performance and interpretation of cardiac computed tomography (CT). J Am Coll Radiol 2006; 3:677-685 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2006.06.006
  3. Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM, Mitsumori LM, Lockhart DW, Dubinsky TJ, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology 2008;248:431-437 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2482072192
  4. Earls JP, Berman EL, Urban BA, Curry CA, Lane JL, Jennings RS, et al. Prospectively gated transverse coronary CT angiography versus retrospectively gated helical technique: improved image quality and reduced radiation dose. Radiology 2008;246:742-753 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2463070989
  5. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, Huber E, Zankl M, Martinoff S, 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 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.602490
  6. Schoepf UJ, Zwerner PL, Savino G, Herzog C, Kerl JM, Costello P. Coronary CT angiography. Radiology 2007; 244:48-63 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2441052145
  7. Siegel MJ, Schmidt B, Bradley D, Suess C, Hildebolt C. Radiation dose and image quality in pediatric CT: effect of technical factors and phantom size and shape. Radiology 2004;233:515-522 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2332032107
  8. ASCI CCT & CMR Guideline Working Group, Jinzaki M, Kitagawa K, Tsai IC, Chan C, Yu W, Yong HS, et al. ASCI 2010 contrast media guideline for cardiac imaging: a report of the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging guideline working group. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;26:203-212
  9. 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;245:720-731 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2453061899
  10. Vanhoenacker PK, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Van Heste R, Decramer I, Van Hoe LR, Wijns W, et al. Diagnostic performance of multidetector CT angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease: meta-analysis. Radiology 2007;244:419-428 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2442061218
  11. Sun Z, Lin C, Davidson R, Dong C, Liao Y. Diagnostic value of 64-slice CT angiography in coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 2008;67:78-84 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.07.014
  12. Stein PD, Yaekoub AY, Matta F, Sostman HD. 64-slice CT for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 2008;121:715-725 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2008.02.039
  13. Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS, Walker S, Fraser C, Jia X, et al. 64-Slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 2008;94:1386-1393 https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2008.145292
  14. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, Zankl M, Gerein P, Dörrler K, et al. Non-invasive coronary computed tomographic angiography for patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the Coronary Angiography by Computed Tomography with the Use of a Submillimeter resolution (CACTUS) trial. Eur Heart J 2007;28:3034-3041 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm150
  15. Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, Gitter M, Sutherland J, Halamert E, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:1724-1732 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.07.031
  16. Maffei E, Palumbo A, Martini C, Meijboom W, Tedeschi C, Spagnolo P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in a large population of patients without revascularisation: registry data and review of multicentre trials. Radiol Med 2010; 115:368-384 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-009-0492-5
  17. Marano R, De Cobelli F, Floriani I, Becker C, Herzog C, Centonze M, et al. Italian multicenter, prospective study to evaluate the negative predictive value of 16- and 64-slice MDCT imaging in patients scheduled for coronary angiography (NIMISCAD-Non Invasive Multicenter Italian Study for Coronary Artery Disease). Eur Radiol 2009;19:1114-1123 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1239-8
  18. Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD, Cramer MJ, Mollet NR, van Mieghem CA, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:2135-2144 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.08.058
  19. Miller JM, Dewey M, Vavere AL, Rochitte CE, Niinuma H, Arbab-Zadeh A, et al. Coronary CT angiography using 64 detector rows: methods and design of the multi-centre trial CORE-64. Eur Radiol 2009;19:816-828 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1203-7
  20. Leber AW, Johnson T, Becker A, von Ziegler F, Tittus J, Nikolaou K, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source multi-slice CT-coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2007;28:2354-2360 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm294
  21. Busch S, Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, von Ziegler F, Knez A, Reiser MF, et al. Visual and automatic grading of coronary artery stenoses with 64-slice CT angiography in reference to invasive angiography. Eur Radiol 2007;17:1445-1451 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0512-y
  22. Husmann L, Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Scheffel H, Valenta I, Hoefflinghaus T, et al. Accuracy of quantitative coronary angiography with computed tomography and its dependency on plaque composition: plaque composition and accuracy of cardiac CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2008; 24:895-904 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-008-9327-z
  23. Husmann L, Schepis T, Scheffel H, Gaemperli O, Leschka S, Valenta I, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with low, intermediate, and high cardiovascular risk. Acad Radiol 2008;15:452-461 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2007.12.008
  24. Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CA, Mollet NR, Pugliese F, Weustink AC, van Pelt N, et al. 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with high, intermediate, or low pretest probability of significant coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1469-1475 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.07.007
  25. Ong TK, Chin SP, Liew CK, Chan WL, Seyfarth MT, Liew HB, et al. Accuracy of 64-row multidetector computed tomography in detecting coronary artery disease in 134 symptomatic patients: influence of calcification. Am Heart J 2006;151:1323
  26. 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 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2005.05.056
  27. Musto C, Simon P, Nicol E, Tanigawa J, Davies SW, Oldershaw PJ, et al. 64-multislice computed tomography in consecutive patients with suspected or proven coronary artery disease: initial single center experience. Int J Cardiol 2007;114:90-97 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.05.047
  28. Brodoefel H, Reimann A, Burgstahler C, Schumacher F, Herberts T, Tsiflikas I, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography in an unselected patient collective: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability and coronary calcifications on image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Eur J Radiol 2008;66: 134-141 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.05.013
  29. Stolzmann P, Scheffel H, Leschka S, Plass A, Baumüller S, Marincek B, et al. Influence of calcifications on diagnostic accuracy of coronary CT angiography using prospective ECG triggering. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191: 1684-1689 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.4040
  30. Leschka S, Wildermuth S, Boehm T, Desbiolles L, Husmann L, Plass A, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. Radiology 2006; 241:378-385 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2412051384
  31. Leschka S, Scheffel H, Husmann L, Gamperli O, Marincek B, Kaufmann PA, et al. Effect of decrease in heart rate variability on the diagnostic accuracy of 64-MDCT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1583-1590 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2000
  32. Meijboom WB, Van Mieghem CA, 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: 636-643 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.05.024
  33. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I, Koepfli P, Husmann L, Scheffel H, et al. Functionally relevant coronary artery disease: comparison of 64-section CT angiography with myocardial perfusion SPECT. Radiology 2008;248:414-423 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2482071307
  34. Schuijf JD, Wijns W, Jukema JW, Atsma DE, de Roos A, Lamb HJ, et al. Relationship between noninvasive coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2508-2514 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.05.080
  35. Scholte AJ, Schuijf JD, Kharagjitsingh AV, Dibbets-Schneider P, Stokkel MP, Jukema JW, et al. Different manifestations of coronary artery disease by stress SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging, coronary calcium scoring, and multislice CT coronary angiography in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Nucl Cardiol 2008;15:503-509 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2008.02.015
  36. Sun J, Zhang Z, Lu B, Yu W, Yang Y, Zhou Y, et al. Identification and quantification of coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a comparison of 64-MDCT and intravascular ultrasound. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:748-754 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2763
  37. Gregory SA, Ferencik M, Achenbach S, Yeh RW, Hoffmann U, Inglessis I, et al. Comparison of sixty-four-slice multidetector computed tomographic coronary angiography to coronary angiography with intravascular ultrasound for the detection of transplant vasculopathy. Am J Cardiol Am J Cardiol 2006;98:877-884 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.04.027
  38. Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, Becker A, Nikolaou K, Paul S, 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 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2005.03.071
  39. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Nieman K, Jang IK, 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;47:1655-1662 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.01.041
  40. Huang WC, Wu MT, Chiou KR, Mar GY, Hsiao SH, Lin SK, et al. Assessing culprit lesions and active complex lesions in patients with early acute myocardial infarction by multidetector computed tomography. Circ J 2008;72: 1806-1813 https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-08-0165
  41. Nakazawa G, Tanabe K, Onuma Y, Yachi S, Aoki J, Yamamoto H, et al. Efficacy of culprit plaque assessment by 64-slice multidetector computed tomography to predict transient no-reflow phenomenon during percutaneous coronary intervention. Am Heart J 2008;155:1150-1157 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2008.01.006
  42. Motoyama S, Kondo T, Sarai M, Sugiura A, Harigaya H, Sato T, et al. Multislice computed tomographic characteristics of coronary lesions in acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:319-326 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.03.044
  43. Motoyama S, Sarai M, Harigaya H, Anno H, Inoue K, Hara T, et al. Computed tomographic angiography characteristics of atherosclerotic plaques subsequently resulting in acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:49-57 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.02.068
  44. Tanaka A, Shimada K, Yoshida K, Jissyo S, Tanaka H, Sakamoto M, et al. Non-invasive assessment of plaque rupture by 64-slice multidetector computed tomography--comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Circ J 2008;72:1276-1281 https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.72.1276
  45. Choi BJ, Kang DK, Tahk SJ, Choi SY, Yoon MH, Lim HS, et al. Comparison of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography with spectral analysis of intravascular ultrasound backscatter signals for characterizations of noncalcified coronary arterial plaques. Am J Cardiol 2008; 102:988-993 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.05.060
  46. Dey D, Schepis T, Marwan M, Slomka PJ, Berman DS, Achenbach S. Automated three-dimensional quantification of noncalcified coronary plaque from coronary CT angiography: comparison with intravascular US. Radiology 2010;257:516-522 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10100681
  47. Hecht HS, Zaric M, Jelnin V, Lubarsky L, Prakash M, Roubin G. Usefulness of 64-detector computed tomographic angiography for diagnosing in-stent restenosis in native coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol 2008;101:820-824 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.09.117
  48. Carrabba N, Bamoshmoosh M, Carusi LM, Parodi G, Valenti R, Migliorini A, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography for detecting drug eluting in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol 2007;100:1754-1758 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.07.038
  49. Carbone I, Francone M, Algeri E, Granatelli A, Napoli A, Kirchin MA, et al. Non-invasive evaluation of coronary artery stent patency with retrospectively ECG-gated 64-slice CT angiography. Eur Radiol 2008;18:234-243 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0756-1
  50. Das KM, El-Menyar AA, Salam AM, Singh R, Dabdoob WA, Albinali HA, et al. Contrast-enhanced 64-section coronary multidetector CT angiography versus conventional coronary angiography for stent assessment. Radiology 2007;245:424-432 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2452061389
  51. Schuijf JD, Pundziute G, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Tuinenburg JC, van der Hoeven BL, et al. Evaluation of patients with previous coronary stent implantation with 64-section CT. Radiology 2007;245:416-423 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2452061199
  52. Oncel D, Oncel G, Karaca M. Coronary stent patency and in-stent restenosis: determination with 64-section multidetector CT coronary angiography--initial experience. Radiology 2007;242:403-409 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2422060065
  53. Rixe J, Achenbach S, Ropers D, Baum U, Kuettner A, Ropers U, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent restenosis by 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography. Eur Heart J 2006;27:2567-2572 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehl303
  54. Cademartiri F, Schuijf JD, Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Jukema JW, Maffei E, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multislice computed tomography coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2204-2210 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.02.045
  55. Ehara M, Kawai M, Surmely JF, Matsubara T, Terashima M, Tsuchikane E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary in-stent restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:951-959 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.10.065
  56. Rist C, von Ziegler F, Nikolaou K, Kirchin MA, Wintersperger BJ, Johnson TR, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent patency and restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography. Acad Radiol 2006;13:1465-1473 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2006.09.044
  57. Sun Z, Davidson R, Lin CH. Multi-detector row CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 2009;69:489-495 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.11.030
  58. Malagutti P, Nieman K, Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CA, 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;28:1879-1885 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehl155
  59. 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;27:976-980
  60. Dikkers R, Willems TP, Tio RA, Anthonio RL, Zijlstra F, Oudkerk M. The benefit of 64-MDCT prior to invasive coronary angiography in symptomatic post-CABG patients. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2007;23:369-377 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-006-9170-z
  61. Ropers D, Pohle FK, 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;114:2334-2341 https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.631051
  62. Meyer TS, Martinoff S, Hadamitzky M, Will A, Kastrati A, Schomig 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;49:946-950 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.10.066
  63. Jabara R, Chronos N, Klein L, Eisenberg S, Allen R, Bradford S, et al. Comparison of multidetector 64-slice computed tomographic angiography to coronary angiography to assess the patency of coronary artery bypass grafts. Am J Cardiol 2007;99:1529-1534 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.01.026
  64. Onuma Y, Tanabe K, Chihara R, Yamamoto H, Miura Y, Kigawa I, et al. Evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts and native coronary arteries using 64-slice multidetector computed tomography. Am Heart J 2007;154:519-526 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2007.04.054
  65. Feuchtner GM, Schachner T, Bonatti J, Friedrich GJ, Soegner P, Klauser A, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-slice computed tomography in evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:574-580 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2174
  66. Datta J, White CS, Gilkeson RC, Meyer CA, Kansal S, Jani ML, et al. Anomalous coronary arteries in adults: depiction at multi-detector row CT angiography. Radiology 2005;235:812-818 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2353040314
  67. Duran C, Kantarci M, Durur Subasi I, Gulbaran M, Sevimli S, Bayram E, et al. Remarkable anatomic anomalies of coronary arteries and their clinical importance: a multidetector computed tomography angiographic study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006;30:939-948 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.rct.0000230004.38521.8e
  68. Kim SY, Seo JB, Do KH, Heo JN, Lee JS, Song JW, et al. Coronary artery anomalies: classification and ECG-gated multi-detector row CT findings with angiographic correlation. Radiographics 2006;26:317-333; discussion 333-334 https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.262055068
  69. Schmid M, Achenbach S, Ludwig J, Baum U, Anders K, Pohle K, et al. Visualization of coronary artery anomalies by contrast-enhanced multi-detector row spiral computed tomography. Int J Cardiol 2006;111:430-435 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2005.08.027
  70. van der Vleuten PA, Willems TP, Götte MJ, Tio RA, Greuter MJ, Zijlstra F, et al. Quantification of global left ventricular function: comparison of multidetector computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. A meta-analysis and review of the current literature. Acta Radiol 2006;47:1049-1057 https://doi.org/10.1080/02841850600977760
  71. Schlosser T, Mohrs OK, Magedanz A, Voigtlander T, Schmermund A, Barkhausen J. Assessment of left ventricular function and mass in patients undergoing computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography using 64-detector-row CT: comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Radiol 2007;48:30-35 https://doi.org/10.1080/02841850601067611
  72. van der Vleuten PA, de Jonge GJ, Lubbers DD, Tio RA, Willems TP, Oudkerk M, et al. Evaluation of global left ventricular function assessment by dual-source computed tomography compared with MRI. Eur Radiol 2009;19: 271-277 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1138-z
  73. Plumhans C, Muhlenbruch G, Rapaee A, Sim KH, Seyfarth T, Gunther RW, et al. Assessment of global right ventricular function on 64-MDCT compared with MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1358-1361 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.3022
  74. Remy-Jardin M, Delhaye D, Teisseire A, Hossein-Foucher C, Duhamel A, Remy J. MDCT of right ventricular function: impact of methodologic approach in estimation of right ventricular ejection fraction, part 2. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:1605-1609 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.1194
  75. Delhaye D, Remy-Jardin M, Teisseire A, Hossein-Foucher C, Leroy S, Duhamel A, et al. MDCT of right ventricular function: comparison of right ventricular ejection fraction estimation and equilibrium radionuclide ventriculog raphy, part 1. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:1597-1604 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.1193
  76. Dogan H, Kroft LJ, Huisman MV, van der Geest RJ, de Roos A. Right ventricular function in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: analysis with electrocardiography-synchronized multi-detector row CT. Radiology 2007; 242:78-84 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2421052089
  77. Schwartzman D, Lacomis J, Wigginton WG. Characterization of left atrium and distal pulmonary vein morphology using multidimensional computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:1349-1357 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00124-4
  78. Cronin P, Sneider MB, Kazerooni EA, Kelly AM, Scharf C, Oral H, et al. MDCT of the left atrium and pulmonary veins in planning radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: a how-to guide. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:767-778 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.183.3.1830767
  79. Lemola K, Sneider M, Desjardins B, Case I, Han J, Good E, et al. Computed tomographic analysis of the anatomy of the left atrium and the esophagus: implications for left atrial catheter ablation. Circulation 2004;110:3655-3660 https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000149714.31471.FD
  80. Tops LF, Bax JJ, Zeppenfeld K, Jongbloed MR, Lamb HJ, van der Wall EE, et al. Fusion of multislice computed tomography imaging with three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping to guide radiofrequency catheter ablation procedures. Heart Rhythm 2005;2:1076-1081 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2005.07.019
  81. Kistler PM, Earley MJ, Harris S, Abrams D, Ellis S, Sporton SC, et al. Validation of three-dimensional cardiac image integration: use of integrated CT image into electroanatomic mapping system to perform catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2006;17: 341-348 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8167.2006.00371.x
  82. Lacomis JM, Goitein O, Deible C, Schwartzman D. CT of the pulmonary veins. J Thorac Imaging 2007;22:63-76 https://doi.org/10.1097/RTI.0b013e3180317aaf
  83. Jongbloed MR, Bax JJ, Lamb HJ, Dirksen MS, Zeppenfeld K, van der Wall EE, et al. Multislice computed tomography versus intracardiac echocardiography to evaluate the pulmonary veins before radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a head-to-head comparison. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:343-350 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2004.10.040
  84. Marsan NA, Tops LF, Holman ER, Van de Veire NR, Zeppenfeld K, Boersma E, et al. Comparison of left atrial volumes and function by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography in patients having catheter ablation tofor atrial fibrillation with persistence of sinus rhythm versus recurrent atrial fibrillation three months later. Am J Cardiol 2008;102:847-853 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.05.048
  85. Jongbloed MR, Lamb HJ, Bax JJ, Schuijf JD, de Roos A, van der Wall EE, et al. Noninvasive visualization of the cardiac venous system using multislice computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:749-753 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2004.11.035
  86. Van de Veire NR, Marsan NA, Schuijf JD, Bleeker GB, Wijffels MC, van Erven L, et al. Noninvasive imaging of cardiac venous anatomy with 64-slice multi-slice computed tomography and noninvasive assessment of left ventricular dyssynchrony by 3-dimensional tissue synchronization imaging in patients with heart failure scheduled for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Am J Cardiol 2008; 101:1023-1029 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.11.052
  87. Feuchtner GM, Dichtl W, Friedrich GJ, Frick M, Alber H, Schachner T, et al. Multislice computed tomography for detection of patients with aortic valve stenosis and quantification of severity. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:1410-1417 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2005.11.056
  88. Feuchtner GM, Müller S, Bonatti J, Schachner T, Velik-Salchner C, Pachinger O, et al. Sixty-four slice CT evaluation of aortic stenosis using planimetry of the aortic valve area. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:197-203 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2069
  89. Alkadhi H, Wildermuth S, Plass A, Bettex D, Baumert B, Leschka S, et al. Aortic stenosis: comparative evaluation of 16-detector row CT and echocardiography. Radiology 2006;240:47-55 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2393050458
  90. Tanaka H, Shimada K, Yoshida K, Jissho S, Yoshikawa J, Yoshiyama M. The simultaneous assessment of aortic valve area and coronary artery stenosis using 16-slice multidetector-row computed tomography in patients with aortic stenosis comparison with echocardiography. Circ J 2007;71:1593-1598 https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.71.1593
  91. Habis M, Daoud B, Roger VL, Ghostine S, Caussin C, Ramadan R, et al. Comparison of 64-slice computed tomography planimetry and Doppler echocardiography in the assessment of aortic valve stenosis. J Heart Valve Dis 2007;16:216-224
  92. Bouvier E, Logeart D, Sablayrolles JL, Feignoux J, Scheuble C, Touche T, et al. Diagnosis of aortic valvular stenosis by multislice cardiac computed tomography. Eur Heart J 2006;27:3033-3038 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehl273
  93. Feuchtner GM, Dichtl W, Muller S, Jodocy D, Schachner T, Klauser A, et al. 64-MDCT for diagnosis of aortic regurgitation in patients referred to CT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191:W1-W7 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.3432
  94. Jassal DS, Shapiro MD, Neilan TG, Chaithiraphan V, Ferencik M, Teague SD, et al. 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for detection of aortic regurgitation and quantification of severity. Invest Radiol 2007;42:507-512 https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3180375556
  95. Alkadhi H, Desbiolles L, Husmann L, Plass A, Leschka S, Scheffel H, et al. Aortic regurgitation: assessment with 64-section CT. Radiology 2007;245:111-121 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2451061523
  96. Alkadhi H, Wildermuth S, Bettex DA, Plass A, Baumert B, Leschka S, et al. Mitral regurgitation: quantification with 16-detector row CT--initial experience. Radiology 2006; 238:454-463 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2381042216
  97. Cook SC, Dyke PC 2nd, Raman SV. Management of adults with congenital heart disease with cardiovascular computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2008; 2:12-22 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2007.11.001
  98. Nicol ED, Gatzoulis M, Padley SP, Rubens M. Assessment of adult congenital heart disease with multi-detector computed tomography: beyond coronary lumenography. Clin Radiol 2007;62:518-527 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2007.01.003
  99. Haller S, Kaiser C, Buser P, Bongartz G, Bremerich J. Coronary artery imaging with contrast-enhanced MDCT: extracardiac findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:105-110 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.04.1988
  100. Kim TJ, Han DH, Jin KN, Won Lee K. Lung cancer detected at cardiac CT: prevalence, clinicoradiologic features, and importance of full-field-of-view images. Radiology 2010;255:369-376 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10091083
  101. Kim JW, Kang EY, Yong HS, Kim YK, Woo OH, Oh YW, et al. Incidental extracardiac findings at cardiac CT angiography: comparison of prevalence and clinical significance between precontrast low-dose whole thoracic scan and postcontrast retrospective ECG-gated cardiac scan. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;25 Suppl 1:75-81 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-008-9417-y
  102. ASCI CCT & CMR Guideline Working Group, Tsai IC, Choi BW, Chan C, Jinzaki M, Kitagawa K, Yong HS, et al. ASCI 2010 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography: a report of the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Cardiac Computed Tomography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guideline Working Group. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;26 Suppl 1:1-15
  103. Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM, Poon M, Hendel RC, Carr JC, et al. ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group, American College of Radiology, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Interventional Radiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:1475-1497 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.07.003
  104. Poon M, Rubin GD, Achenbach S, Attebery TW, Berman DS, Brady TJ, et al. Consensus update on the appropriate usage of cardiac computed tomographic angiography. J Invasive Cardiol 2007;19:484-490
  105. Schroeder S, Achenbach S, Bengel F, Burgstahler C, Cademartiri F, de Feyter P, 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 2008;29:531-556 https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm544
  106. Dennie CJ, Leipsic J, Brydie A; Canadian Association of Radiologists. Canadian Association of Radiologists: Consensus Guidelines and Standards for Cardiac CT. Can Assoc Radiol J 2009;60:19-34 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carj.2009.02.006
  107. 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 Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:1864-1894 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2010.07.005