Current and future trends in multimodality imaging of coronary artery disease

References

• Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Lorell BH, et al. ACC/AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging–executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASNC Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging). Circulation 2003;108(11):1404-18
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jager PL, Buiting M, Mouden M, et al. [Regadenoson as a new stress agent in myocardial perfusion imaging. Initial experience in The Netherlands]. Revista espanola de medicina nuclear e imagen molecular 2014;33(6):346-51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Single photon emission computed tomography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 2010;10(8):1-64
   Google Scholar
• Slomka PJ, Patton JA, Berman DS, Germano G. Advances in technical aspects of myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2009;16(2):255-76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumita S, Cho K, Nakajo H, et al. Clinical applications of ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nippon Med Sch 2006;73(5):248-57
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tamaki N, Morita K. SPET in cardiology. Diagnosis, prognosis, and management of patients with coronary artery disease. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;49(2):193-203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker MW, Iskandar A, Limone B, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of cardiac positron emission tomography versus single photon emission computed tomography for coronary artery disease: a bivariate meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5(6):700-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun ZH, Rashmizal H, Xu L. Molecular imaging of plaques in coronary arteries with PET and SPECT. J Geriatr Cardiol 2014;11(3):259-73
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lebowitz E, Greene MW, Fairchild R, et al. Thallium-201 for medical use. I. J Nuc Med 1975;16(2):151-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sogbein OO, Pelletier-Galarneau M, Schindler TH, et al. New SPECT and PET radiopharmaceuticals for imaging cardiovascular disease. BioMed Res Int 2014;2014:942960
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Won KS, Song BI. Recent trends in nuclear cardiology practice. Chonnam Med J 2013;49(2):55-64
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Partington SL, Kwong RY, Dorbala S. Multimodality imaging in the assessment of myocardial viability. Heart Fail Rev 2011;16(4):381-95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allman KC, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Udelson JE. Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39(7):1151-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camici PG, Prasad SK, Rimoldi OE. Stunning, hibernation, and assessment of myocardial viability. Circulation 2008;117(1):103-14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slart RH, Bax JJ, van Veldhuisen DJ, et al. Imaging techniques in nuclear cardiology for the assessment of myocardial viability. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2006;22(1):63-80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inaba Y, Chen JA, Bergmann SR. Quantity of viable myocardium required to improve survival with revascularization in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy: A meta-analysis. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17(4):646-54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Hendel RC, et al. Cardiovascular disease risk stratification with stress single-photon emission computed tomography technetium-99m tetrofosmin imaging in patients with the metabolic syndrome and diabetes mellitus. Am J Cardiol 2006;97(10):1538-44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iskandrian AS, Chae SC, Heo J, et al. Independent and incremental prognostic value of exercise single-photon emission computed tomographic (SPECT) thallium imaging in coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;22(3):665-70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Go V, Bhatt MR, Hendel RC. The diagnostic and prognostic value of ECG-gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med 2004;45(5):912-21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma H, Li S, Wu Z, et al. Comparison of (9)(9)mTc-N-DBODC5 and (9)(9)mTc-MIBI of myocardial perfusion imaging for diagnosis of coronary artery disease. BioMed Res Int 2013;2013:145427
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschi A, Uccelli L, Bolzati C, et al. Synthesis and biologic evaluation of monocationic asymmetric 99mTc-nitride heterocomplexes showing high heart uptake and improved imaging properties. J Nucl Med 2003;44(5):806-14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim YS, Wang J, Broisat A, et al. Tc-99m-N-MPO: novel cationic Tc-99m radiotracer for myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2008;15(4):535-46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He Z, Hsieh WY, Kim YS, Liu S. Evaluation of novel cationic 99mTc(I)-tricarbonyl complexes as potential radiotracers for myocardial perfusion imaging. Nucl Med Biol 2006;33(8):1045-53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goethals LR, Santos I, Caveliers V, et al. Rapid hepatic clearance of 99mTc-TMEOP: a new candidate for myocardial perfusion imaging. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 2011;6(4):178-88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia EV, Faber TL, Esteves FP. Cardiac dedicated ultrafast SPECT cameras: new designs and clinical implications. J Nucl Med 2011;52(2):210-17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison SD, Harrison MA, Duvall WL. Stress myocardial perfusion imaging in the emergency department–new techniques for speed and diagnostic accuracy. Curr Cardiol Rev 2012;8(2):116-22
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McArdle B, Dowsley TF, Cocker MS, et al. Cardiac PET: metabolic and functional imaging of the myocardium. Semin Nucl Med 2013;43(6):434-48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Knaapen P. Diagnosing coronary artery disease with hybrid PET/CT: it takes two to tango. J Nucl Cardiol 2013;20(5):874-90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoshinaga K, Chow BJ, Williams K, et al. What is the prognostic value of myocardial perfusion imaging using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography? J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48(5):1029-39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joutsiniemi E, Saraste A, Pietila M, et al. Absolute flow or myocardial flow reserve for the detection of significant coronary artery disease? Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2014;15(6):659-65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick TH, Shan K, Patel S, et al. Incremental value of rubidium-82 positron emission tomography for prognostic assessment of known or suspected coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1997;80(7):865-70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lertsburapa K, Ahlberg AW, Bateman TM, et al. Independent and incremental prognostic value of left ventricular ejection fraction determined by stress gated rubidium 82 PET imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 2008;15(6):745-53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Carli MF, Dorbala S, Meserve J, et al. Clinical myocardial perfusion PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2007;48(5):783-93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU, et al. ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63(4):380-406
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson NP, Gould KL. Integrating noninvasive absolute flow, coronary flow reserve, and ischemic thresholds into a comprehensive map of physiological severity. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5(4):430-40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herzog BA, Husmann L, Valenta I, et al. Long-term prognostic value of 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography added value of coronary flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54(2):150-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joshi NV, Vesey A, Newby DE, Dweck MR. Will 18F-sodium fluoride PET-CT imaging be the magic bullet for identifying vulnerable coronary atherosclerotic plaques? Curr Cardiol Rep 2014;16(9):521
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudd JH, Warburton EA, Fryer TD, et al. Imaging atherosclerotic plaque inflammation with [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Circulation 2002;105(23):2708-11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim HJ, Oh M, Moon DH, et al. Carotid inflammation on (1)(8)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography associates with recurrent ischemic lesions. J Neurol Sci 2014;347(1-2):242-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marzola MC, Saboury B, Chondrogiannis S, et al. Role of FDG PET/CT in investigating the mechanisms underlying atherosclerotic plaque formation and evolution. Revista espanola de medicina nuclear e imagen molecular 2013;32(4):246-52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ogawa M, Ishino S, Mukai T, et al. (18)F-FDG accumulation in atherosclerotic plaques: immunohistochemical and PET imaging study. J Nucl Med 2004;45(7):1245-50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masteling MG, Zeebregts CJ, Tio RA, et al. High-resolution imaging of human atherosclerotic carotid plaques with micro 18F-FDG PET scanning exploring plaque vulnerability. J Nucl Cardiol 2011;18(6):1066-75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joshi NV, Vesey AT, Williams MC, et al. 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography for identification of ruptured and high-risk coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a prospective clinical trial. Lancet 2014;383(9918):705-13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dweck MR, Chow MW, Joshi NV, et al. Coronary arterial 18F-sodium fluoride uptake: a novel marker of plaque biology. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59(17):1539-48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schindler TH, Nitzsche EU, Olschewski M, et al. PET-measured responses of MBF to cold pressor testing correlate with indices of coronary vasomotion on quantitative coronary angiography. J Nucl Med 2004;45(3):419-28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoshinaga K, Manabe O, Tamaki N. Assessment of coronary endothelial function using PET. J Nucl Cardiol 2011;18(3):486-500
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anagnostopoulos C, Georgakopoulos A, Pianou N, Nekolla SG. Assessment of myocardial perfusion and viability by positron emission tomography. Int J Cardiol 2013;167(5):1737-49
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monroy AG SD, Telich JE, et al. The use of 18F-FDG PET in Cardiology. UpDate 2012;1(2):33-9
   Google Scholar
• Al Moudi M, Sun ZH. Diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG PET in the assessment of myocardial viability in coronary artery disease: A comparative study with (99m)Tc SPECT and echocardiography. J Geriatr Cardiol 2014;11(3):229-36
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ling LF, Marwick TH, Flores DR, et al. Identification of therapeutic benefit from revascularization in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: inducible ischemia versus hibernating myocardium. Circul Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6(3):363-72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schinkel AF, Bax JJ, Poldermans D, et al. Hibernating myocardium: diagnosis and patient outcomes. Curr Probl Cardiol 2007;32(7):375-410
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhl HP, Lipke CS, Krombach GA, et al. Assessment of reversible myocardial dysfunction in chronic ischaemic heart disease: comparison of contrast-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance and a combined positron emission tomography-single photon emission computed tomography imaging protocol. Eur Heart J 2006;27(7):846-53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holly TA, Bonow RO, Arnold JM, et al. Myocardial viability and impact of surgical ventricular reconstruction on outcomes of patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery: results of the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014;148(6):2677-84. e2671
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valenta I, Quercioli A, Ruddy T, Schindler T. Assessment of myocardial viability after the STICH trial: still viable? Cardiovasc Med 2013;16(11):289-98
   Google Scholar
• Nieman K, Oudkerk M, Rensing BJ, et al. Coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography. Lancet 2001;357(9256):599-603
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achenbach S, Giesler T, Ropers D, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses by contrast-enhanced, retrospectively electrocardiographically-gated, multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2001;103(21):2535-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knez A, Becker CR, Leber A, et al. Usefulness of multislice spiral computed tomography angiography for determination of coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol 2001;88(10):1191-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nappi C, Acampa W, Pellegrino T, et al. Beyond ultrasound: advances in multimodality cardiac imaging. Intern Emerg Med 2015;10(1):9-20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijk RA, Virmani R, von der Thusen JH, et al. The natural history of aortic atherosclerosis: a systematic histopathological evaluation of the peri-renal region. Atherosclerosis 2010;210(1):100-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petretta M, Costanzo P, Acampa W, et al. Noninvasive assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion: going toward an integrated imaging approach. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 2008;9(10):977-86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintz GS, Pichard AD, Popma JJ, et al. Determinants and correlates of target lesion calcium in coronary artery disease: a clinical, angiographic and intravascular ultrasound study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;29(2):268-74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budoff MJ, Shaw LJ, Liu ST, et al. Long-term prognosis associated with coronary calcification: observations from a registry of 25,253 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49(18):1860-70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Detrano R, Guerci AD, Carr JJ, et al. Coronary calcium as a predictor of coronary events in four racial or ethnic groups. N Engl J Med 2008;358(13):1336-45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, et al. Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990;15(4):827-32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson KM, Dowe DA. The detection of any coronary calcium outperforms Framingham risk score as a first step in screening for coronary atherosclerosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(5):1235-43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glagov S, Weisenberg E, Zarins CK, et al. Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med 1987;316(22):1371-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, 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(21):1724-32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52(25):2135-44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller JM, Rochitte CE, Dewey M, et al. Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT. N Engl J Med 2008;359(22):2324-36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vlodaver Z, Frech R, Van Tassel RA, Edwards JE. Correlation of the antemortem coronary arteriogram and the postmortem specimen. Circulation 1973;47(1):162-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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(6):1230-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldrovandi A, Cademartiri F, Arduini D, et al. Response to the letter by Opolski et al regarding article, ‘Computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with acute myocardial infarction without significant coronary stenosis’. Circulation 2013;128(13):e202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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(5):664-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Blumenthal RS, et al. Assessment of coronary artery disease by cardiac computed tomography: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and Committee on Cardiac Imaging, Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation 2006;114(16):1761-91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA, et al. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 2005;112(15):2318-23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Cecco CN, Meinel FG, Chiaramida SA, et al. Coronary artery computed tomography scanning. Circulation 2014;129(12):1341-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamon M, Biondi-Zoccai GG, Malagutti P, et al. Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared with conventional invasive coronary angiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48(9):1896-910
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas PS, Hoffmann U, Patel MR, et al. Outcomes of anatomical versus functional testing for coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2015;372(14):1291-300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanhoenacker PK, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Van Heste R, et al. Diagnostic performance of multidetector CT angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease: meta-analysis. Radiology 2007;244(2):419-28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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(3):720-31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li M, Du XM, Jin ZT, et al. The diagnostic performance of coronary artery angiography with 64-MSCT and post 64-MSCT: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2014;9(1):e84937
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakazato R, Park HB, Berman DS, et al. Noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from computed tomography angiography for coronary lesions of intermediate stenosis severity: results from the DeFACTO study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6(6):881-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redberg RF, Walsh J. Pay now, benefits may follow–the case of cardiac computed tomographic angiography. N Engl J Med 2008;359(22):2309-11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shreibati JB, Baker LC, Hlatky MA. Association of coronary CT angiography or stress testing with subsequent utilization and spending among Medicare beneficiaries. Jama 2011;306(19):2128-36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijboom WB, Van Mieghem CA, van Pelt N, 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(8):636-43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koo BK, Erglis A, Doh JH, et al. Diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58(19):1989-97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tonino PA, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, et al. Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55(25):2816-21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Leipsic J, Pencina MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. Jama 2012;308(12):1237-45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coenen A, Lubbers MM, Kurata A, et al. Fractional flow reserve computed from noninvasive CT angiography data: diagnostic performance of an on-site clinician-operated computational fluid dynamics algorithm. Radiology 2015;274(3):674-83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hlatky MA, Saxena A, Koo BK, et al. Projected costs and consequences of computed tomography-determined fractional flow reserve. Clin Cardiol 2013;36(12):743-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Koo BK, Erglis A, et al. Usefulness of noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms for intermediate stenoses confirmed by quantitative coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol 2012;110(7):971-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leipsic J, Yang TH, Thompson A, et al. CT angiography (CTA) and diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve: results from the Determination of Fractional Flow Reserve by Anatomic CTA (DeFACTO) study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014;202(5):989-94
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong DT, Ko BS, Cameron JD, et al. Transluminal attenuation gradient in coronary computed tomography angiography is a novel noninvasive approach to the identification of functionally significant coronary artery stenosis: a comparison with fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61(12):1271-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng M, Wei M, Wen D, et al. Transluminal attenuation gradient in coronary computed tomography angiography for determining stenosis severity of calcified coronary artery: a primary study with dual-source CT. Eur Radiol 2014. [Epub ahead of print]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi JH, Min JK, Labounty TM, et al. Intracoronary transluminal attenuation gradient in coronary CT angiography for determining coronary artery stenosis. JACC Cardiovascular imaging 2011;4(11):1149-57
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon YE, Choi JH, Kim JH, et al. Noninvasive diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenosis using CT angiography: diagnostic value of transluminal attenuation gradient and fractional flow reserve computed from coronary CT angiography compared to invasively measured fractional flow reserve. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5(11):1088-96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George RT, Silva C, Cordeiro MA, et al. Multidetector computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging during adenosine stress. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48(1):153-60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feuchtner G, Goetti R, Plass A, et al. Adenosine stress high-pitch 128-slice dual-source myocardial computed tomography perfusion for imaging of reversible myocardial ischemia: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4(5):540-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huber AM, Leber V, Gramer BM, et al. Myocardium: dynamic versus single-shot CT perfusion imaging. Radiology 2013;269(2):378-86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blankstein R, Shturman LD, Rogers IS, et al. Adenosine-induced stress myocardial perfusion imaging using dual-source cardiac computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54(12):1072-84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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(3):174-82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okada DR, Ghoshhajra BB, Blankstein R, et al. Direct comparison of rest and adenosine stress myocardial perfusion CT with rest and stress SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17(1):27-37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lardo AC, Cordeiro MA, Silva C, et al. Contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography viability imaging after myocardial infarction: characterization of myocyte death, microvascular obstruction, and chronic scar. Circulation 2006;113(3):394-404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achenbach S, Goroll T, Seltmann M, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses by low-dose, prospectively ECG-triggered, high-pitch spiral coronary CT angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4(4):328-37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun K, Han RJ, Cui LF, et al. Feasibility and diagnostic accuracy for assessment of coronary artery stenosis of prospectively electrocardiogram-gated high-pitch spiral acquisition mode dual-source CT Coronary Angiography in Patients with Relatively Higher Heart Rates: in Comparison with Catheter Coronary Angiography. Chin Med Sci J 2013;27(4):213-19
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang Y, Zhang Z, Kong L, et al. Dual-source CT coronary angiography in patients with atrial fibrillation: comparison with single-source CT. Eur J Radiol 2008;68(3):434-41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samad Z, Hakeem A, Mahmood SS, et al. A meta-analysis and systematic review of computed tomography angiography as a diagnostic triage tool for patients with chest pain presenting to the emergency department. J Nucl Cardiol 2012;19(2):364-76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stillman AE, Oudkerk M, Ackerman M, et al. Use of multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of acute chest pain: a consensus statement of the North American Society of Cardiac Imaging and the European Society of Cardiac Radiology. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2007;23(4):415-27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pohost GM. The history of cardiovascular magnetic resonance. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;1(5):672-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gotte MJ, van Rossum AC, Twisk JWR et al. Quantification of regional contractile function after infarction: strain analysis superior to wall thickening analysis in discriminating infarct from remote myocardium. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37(3):808-17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rischpler C, Nekolla SG, Dregely I, Schwaiger M. Hybrid PET/MR imaging of the heart: potential, initial experiences, and future prospects. J Nucl Med 2013;54(3):402-15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scholtz L, Sarkin A, Lockhat Z. Current clinical applications of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. Cardiovasc J Afr 2014;25(4):185-90
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schuster A, Morton G, Chiribiri A, et al. Imaging in the management of ischemic cardiomyopathy: special focus on magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59(4):359-70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nandalur KR, Dwamena BA, Choudhri AF, et al. Diagnostic performance of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50(14):1343-53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettencourt N, Chiribiri A, Schuster A, et al. Direct comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance and multidetector computed tomography stress-rest perfusion imaging for detection of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61(10):1099-107
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenwood JP, Maredia N, Younger JF, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography for diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CE-MARC): a prospective trial. Lancet 2012;379(9814):453-60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwitter J, Wacker CM, Wilke N, et al. MR-IMPACT II: magnetic resonance imaging for myocardial perfusion assessment in coronary artery disease Trial: perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance vs. single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparative multicentre, multivendor trial. Eur Heart J 2013;34(10):775-81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thom H, West NE, Hughes V, et al. Cost-effectiveness of initial stress cardiovascular MR, stress SPECT or stress echocardiography as a gate-keeper test, compared with upfront invasive coronary angiography in the investigation and management of patients with stable chest pain: mid-term outcomes from the CECaT randomised controlled trial. BMJ open 2014;4(2):e003419
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaarsma C, Leiner T, Bekkers SC, et al. Diagnostic performance of noninvasive myocardial perfusion imaging using single-photon emission computed tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance, and positron emission tomography imaging for the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59(19):1719-28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morton G, Chiribiri A, Ishida M, et al. Quantification of absolute myocardial perfusion in patients with coronary artery disease: comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60(16):1546-55
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipinski MJ, McVey CM, Berger JS, et al. Prognostic value of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62(9):826-38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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;361(9355):374-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim RJ, Wu E, Rafael A, et al. The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2000;343(20):1445-53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheong BY, Muthupillai R, Wilson JM, et al. Prognostic significance of delayed-enhancement magnetic resonance imaging: survival of 857 patients with and without left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 2009;120(21):2069-76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bree D, Wollmuth JR, Cupps BP, et al. Low-dose dobutamine tissue-tagged magnetic resonance imaging with 3-dimensional strain analysis allows assessment of myocardial viability in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Circulation 2006;114(1 Suppl):I33-6
   Google Scholar
• Baer FM, Theissen P, Schneider CA, et al. Dobutamine magnetic resonance imaging predicts contractile recovery of chronically dysfunctional myocardium after successful revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;31(5):1040-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verhaert D, Thavendiranathan P, Giri S, et al. Direct T2 quantification of myocardial edema in acute ischemic injury. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;4(3):269-78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El Aidi H, Adams A, Moons KG, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging findings and the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with recent myocardial infarction or suspected or known coronary artery disease: a systematic review of prognostic studies. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63(11):1031-45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedrich MG, Sechtem U, Schulz-Menger J, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in myocarditis: A JACC White Paper. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53(17):1475-87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lima JA. The promise of myocardial fibrosis assessment by T1 mapping. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6(4):485-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prior JO, Farhad H, Muller O. Multimodality Imaging in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy. Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep 2014;7:9285
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Notghi A, Low CS. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy: past, present and future. Br J Radiol 2011;84(Spec No 3):S229-36
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schaap J, de Groot JA, Nieman K, et al. Hybrid myocardial perfusion SPECT/CT coronary angiography and invasive coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris lead to similar treatment decisions. Heart 2013;99(3):188-94
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truong QA, Gewirtz H. Cardiac PET-CT for monitoring medical and interventional therapy in patients with CAD: PET alone versus hybrid PET-CT? Curr Cardiol Rep 2014;16(3):460
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slomka PJ, Berman DS, Germano G. New cardiac cameras: single-photon emission CT and PET. Semin Nucl Med 2014;44(4):232-51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petibon Y, El Fakhri G, Nezafat R, et al. Towards coronary plaque imaging using simultaneous PET-MR: a simulation study. Phys Med Biol 2014;59(5):1203-22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fazel R, Gerber TC, Balter S, et al. Approaches to enhancing radiation safety in cardiovascular imaging: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2014;130(19):1730-48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar