Journal of the American College of Radiology
Volume 7, Issue 6 , Pages 392-395 , June 2010

Imaging of Coronary Artery Disease: The Big Picture

  • Eugene Lin, MD

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationEugene Lin, MD, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Department of Radiology, 1100 Ninth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101

References 

  1. Little WC, Constantinescu M, Applegate RJ, et al. Can coronary angiography predict the site of a subsequent myocardial infarction in patients with mild-to-moderate coronary artery disease?. Circulation. 1988;78:1157–1166
  2. Falk E, Shah PK, Vuster F. Coronary plaque disruption. Circulation. 1995;92:657–671
  3. Narula J, Garg P, Achenbach S, et al. Arthimetic of vulnerable plaques for noninvasive imaging. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2008;5:S2–S10
  4. Greenland P, Bonow RO, Brundage BH, et al. ACCF/AHA 2007 clinical expert consensus document on coronary artery calcium scoring by computed tomography in global cardiovascular risk assessment and in evaluation of patients with chest pain: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force. Circulation. 2007;115:402–406
  5. Stein JH, Korcarz CE, Hurst RT, et al. Use of carotid ultrasound to identify subclinical vascular disease and evaluate cardiovascular disease risk: a consensus statement from the American society of echocardiography carotid intima-media thickness task force endorsed by the society for vascular medicine. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2008;21:93–111
  6. Leber AW, Becker A, Knez A, et al. Accuracy of 64 slice computed tomography to classify and quantify plaque volumes in the proximal coronary system. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:672–677
  7. Otsuka M, Bruining N, van Pelt NC, et al. Quantification of coronary plaque by 64 slice computed tomography: a comparison with quantitative intracoronary ultrasound. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:314–321
  8. Cheng VY, Nakazato R, Dey D, et al. Reproducibility of coronary artery plaque volume and composition quantification by 64 detector row coronary computed tomography angiography: an intraobserver, interobserver, and interscan variability study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:312–320
  9. Phole K, Achenbach S, MacNeill B, et al. Characterization of non-calcified coronary atherosclerotic plaque by multi-detector row CT: comparison to IVUS. Atherosclerosis. 2007;190:174–180
  10. Choi BJ, Kang DK, Tahk SJ, Choi SY. Comparison of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography with spectral analysis of intravascular ultrasound backscatter signals for characterization of noncalcified arterial plaques. Am J Cardiol. 2008;102:988–993
  11. Horiguchi J, Fujioka C, Kiguchi M, et al. Soft and intermediate plaques in coronary arteries: how accurately can we measure CT attenuation using 64-MDCT?. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:981–988
  12. Matter CM, Stuber M, Nahrendorf M. Imaging of the unstable plaque: how far have we got?. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:2566–2574
  13. Wykrykowska J, Lehman S, Williams G, et al. Imaging of inflamed and vulnerable plaque in coronary arteries with 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with suppression of myocardial uptake using a low-carbohydrate, high-fat preparation. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:563–568
  14. Reuhm SG, Corot C, Vogt P, Kolb S, Debatin JP. Magnetic resonance imaging of atherosclerotic plaque with ultrasmall superparamagnetic particles of iron oxide in hyperlipidemic rabbits. Circulation. 2001;103:415–422
  15. Oppenheim C, Naggara O, Touze E, et al. High-resolution MR imaging of the cervical arterial wall: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiographics. 2009;29:1413–1431
  16. Bonow RO. Should coronary calcium screening be used in cardiovascular prevention strategies?. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:990–997
  17. Lauer MS. Discarding logic. Circulation. 2009;119;:1533–1537
  18. Naghavi M, Falk E, Hecht HS, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient—part III: executive summary of the Screening for Heart Attack Prevention and Education (SHAPE) Task Force report. Am J Cardiol. 2006;17(suppl):98;:2H-15H
  19. Naghavi M, Hecht HS. Vulnerable patients are between a “ROC and a hard place”: yes, it's time to screen for coronary artery disease. Cleve Clin J Med. 2007;74:757–758
  20. Texas passes SHAPE bill requiring reimbursement for MI screening. http://cardiobrief.org/2009/06/23/shape-bill-passes-in-texas-requiring-reimbursement-for-mi-screening/Accessed March 17, 2010
  21. Schinkel AF, Bax JJ, Geleijnse ML, et al. Noninvasive evaluation of ischaemic heart disease: myocardial perfusion imaging or stress echocardiography?. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:789–800
  22. Uebleis C, Becker A, Griesshammer I, et al. Stable coronary artery disease: prognostic value of myocardial perfusion SPECT in relation to coronary calcium scoring—long-term follow-up. Radiology. 2009;252:682–690
  23. Ramakrishna G, Miller TD, Breen JF, et al. Relationship and prognostic value of coronary artery calcification by electron beam computed tomography to stress-induced ischemia by single photon computed tomography. Am Heart J. 2007;153:807–814
  24. Oncel D, Oncel G, Tastan A. Effectiveness of dual-source CT coronary angiography for the evaluation of coronary artery disease with atrial fibrillation: initial experience. Radiology. 2007;245:703–711
  25. Bastarrika G, Lee YS, Huda W, et al. CT of coronary artery disease. Radiology. 2009;253:317–338
  26. Gould KL. Does coronary flow trump coronary anatomy?. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:1009–1023
  27. Torino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:213–224
  28. Hendel RC, Berman DS, DiCarli MF, et al. ACCF/ASNC/ACR/AHA/ASE/SCCT/SCMR/SNM 2009 appropriate use criteria for cardiac radionuclide imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and the Society of Nuclear Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:2201–2229
  29. Di Carli M, Dorbola S, Meserve J, et al. Clinical myocardial perfusion PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:783–792
  30. Go RT, Marwick TH, MacIntyre WJ, et al. A prospective comparison of rubidium-82 PET and thallium-201 SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging using a single dipyridamole stress in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:1899–1905
  31. Stewart RE, Schwaiger M, Molina E, et al. Comparison of rubidium-82 positron and thallium-201 SPECT imaging for the detection of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1991;67:1303–1310
  32. Bateman TM, Heller GV, McGhie AI, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of rest/stress ECG-gated Rb-82 myocardial perfusion PET: comparison with ECG-gated Tc99m sestamibi SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;13:24–33
  33. Schwitter J, Wacker CM, van Rossum AC, et al. MR-IMPACT: comparison of perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance with single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease in a multicentre, multivendor, randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2009;29:480–491
  34. Wagner A, Mahrholdt H, Holly TA, et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI and routine single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) perfusion imaging for detection of subendocardial myocardial infarcts: an imaging study. Lancet. 2003;261:374–379
  35. Steel K, Broderick R, Gandla V, et al. Complementary prognostic values of stress myocardial perfusion and late gadolinium enhancement imaging by cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2009;120:1390–1400
  36. George RT, Arbab-Zadeh A, Miller JM, et al. Adenosine stress 64- and 256-row detector computed tomography angiography and perfusion imaging: a pilot study evaluating the transmural extent of perfusion abnormalities to predict atherosclerosis causing myocardial ischemia. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:174–182
  37. Gerber BL, Belge B, Legros GJ, et al. Characterization of acute and chronic myocardial infarcts by multidetector computed tomography: comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2006;113:823–833
  38. Stillman AE. What has happened to cardiac MRI?. J Am Coll Radiol. 2007;4:224–226

PII: S1546-1440(10)00072-4

doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2010.02.002

Journal of the American College of Radiology
Volume 7, Issue 6 , Pages 392-395 , June 2010

Article Tools