Integrative computed tomographic imaging of coronary artery disease

References

• Yusuf S, Reddy S, Ounpuu S, Anand S. Global burden of cardiovascular diseases: Part II: variations in cardiovascular disease by specific ethnic groups and geographic regions and prevention strategies. Circulation104, 2855–2864 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yusuf S, Reddy S, Ounpuu S, Anand S. Global burden of cardiovascular diseases: part I: general considerations, the epidemiologic transition, risk factors, and impact of urbanization. Circulation104, 2746–2753 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quercioli A, Montecucco F, Bertolotto M et al. Coronary artery calcification and cardiovascular risk: the role of RANKL/OPG signalling. Eur. J. Clin. Invest.40, 645–654 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bastarrika G, Lee YS, Huda W, Ruzsics B, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. CT of coronary artery disease. Radiology253, 317–338 (2009).
   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.52, 2135–2144 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadamitzky M, Freissmuth B, Meyer T et al. Prognostic value of coronary computed tomographic angiography for prediction of cardiac events in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging2, 404–411 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Giessen AG, Toepker MH, Donelly PM et al. Reproducibility, accuracy, and predictors of accuracy for the detection of coronary atherosclerotic plaque composition by computed tomography: an ex vivo comparison to intravascular ultrasound. Invest. Radiol.45(11), 693–701 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrascosa P, Capunay C, Deviggiano A et al. Accuracy of low-dose prospectively gated axial coronary CT angiography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis in patients with stable heart rate. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr.4, 197–205 (2010).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• de Graaf FR, Schuijf JD, van Velzen JE et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 320-row multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography to noninvasively assess in-stent restenosis. Invest. Radiol.45, 331–340 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Klepzig H. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source multi-slice CT-coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease. Eur. Heart J.29, 680 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Leber AW, Johnson T, Becker A 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.28, 2354–2360 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapoor D, Thompson RC. Diagnostic accuracy of CT coronary angiography. Cardiol. Clin.27, 563–571 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnoldi E, Ramos-Duran L, Abro JA et al. [Coronary CT angiography using prospective ECG triggering: high diagnostic accuracy with low radiation dose.] Radiologe50, 500–506 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Hessel SJ, Adams DF, Judy PF, Fishbein MC, Abrams HL. Detection of myocardial ischemia in vitro by computed tomography. Radiology127, 413–418 (1978).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilfiker PR, Weishaupt D, Marincek B. Multislice spiral computed tomography of subacute myocardial infarction. Circulation104, 1083 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Juergens KU, Grude M, Fallenberg EM et al. Using ECG-gated multidetector CT to evaluate global left ventricular myocardial function in patients with coronary artery disease. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.179, 1545–1550 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahnken AH, Spuntrup E, Wildberger JE et al. [Quantification of cardiac function with multislice spiral CT using retrospective EKG-gating: comparison with MRI]. Rofo175, 83–88 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Mochizuki T, Murase K, Higashino H, Koyama Y, Azemoto S, Ikezoe J. Images in cardiovascular medicine. Demonstration of acute myocardial infarction by subsecond spiral computed tomography: early defect and delayed enhancement. Circulation99, 2058–2059 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Mohlenkamp S, Lerman LO, Lerman A et al. Minimally invasive evaluation of coronary microvascular function by electron beam computed tomography. Circulation102, 2411–2416 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Willmann JK, Weishaupt D, Lachat M et al. Electrocardiographically gated multi-detector row CT for assessment of valvular morphology and calcification in aortic stenosis. Radiology225, 120–128 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leschka S, Stolzmann P, Desbiolles L et al. Diagnostic accuracy of high-pitch dual-source CT for the assessment of coronary stenoses: first experience. Eur. Radiol.19, 2896–2903 (2009).
   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.48, 153–160 (2006).
   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. Imaging2, 174–182 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George RT, Jerosch-Herold M, Silva C et al. Quantification of myocardial perfusion using dynamic 64-detector computed tomography. Invest. Radiol.42, 815–822 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen Y, Qian JY, Wang MH et al. Quantitative and qualitative assessment of non-obstructive left main coronary artery plaques using 64-multislice computed tomography compared with intravascular ultrasound. Chin. Med. J. (Engl.)123, 827–833 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• van Werkhoven JM, Bax JJ, Nucifora G et al. The value of multi-slice-computed tomography coronary angiography for risk stratification. J. Nucl. Cardiol.16, 970–980 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipton MJ, Higgins CB, Farmer D, Boyd DP. Cardiac imaging with a high-speed Cine-CT scanner: preliminary results. Radiology152, 579–582 (1984).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achenbach S, Ulzheimer S, Baum U et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography by retrospectively ECG-gated multislice spiral CT. Circulation102, 2823–2828 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kachelriess M, Ulzheimer S, Kalender WA. ECG-correlated image reconstruction from subsecond multi-slice spiral CT scans of the heart. Med. Phys.27, 1881–1902 (2000).
   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.88, 1191–1194 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Becker C et al. Cardiac imaging by means of electrocardiographically gated multisection spiral CT: initial experience. Radiology217, 564–571 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroeder S, Kopp AF, Baumbach A et al. Noninvasive detection and evaluation of atherosclerotic coronary plaques with multislice computed tomography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.37, 1430–1435 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klingenbeck-Regn K, Schaller S, Flohr T, Ohnesorge B, Kopp AF, Baum U. Subsecond multi-slice computed tomography: basics and applications. Eur. J. Radiol.31, 110–124 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dewey M, Hoffmann H, Hamm B. CT coronary angiography using 16 and 64 simultaneous detector rows: intraindividual comparison. Rofo179, 581–586 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Hamon M, Morello R, Riddell JW. Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography – meta-analysis. Radiology245, 720–731 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flohr T, Stierstorfer K, Raupach R, Ulzheimer S, Bruder H. Performance evaluation of a 64-slice CT system with z-flying focal spot. Rofo176, 1803–1810 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Herzog C, Britten M, Balzer JO et al. Multidetector-row cardiac CT: diagnostic value of calcium scoring and CT coronary angiography in patients with symptomatic, but atypical, chest pain. Eur. Radiol.14, 169–177 (2004).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leschka S, Wildermuth S, Boehm T et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. Radiology241, 378–385 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H et al. First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur. Radiol.16, 256–268 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, Wintersperger BJ et al. Dual-source CT cardiac imaging: initial experience. Eur. Radiol.16, 1409–1415 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achenbach S, Marwan M, Ropers D et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 mSv using prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition. Eur. Heart J.31, 340–346 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Flohr TG, Leng S, Yu L et al. Dual-source spiral CT with pitch up to 3.2 and 75 ms temporal resolution: image reconstruction and assessment of image quality. Med. Phys.36, 5641–5653 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Mori S, Endo M, Nishizawa K, Murase K, Fujiwara H, Tanada S. Comparison of patient doses in 256-slice CT and 16-slice CT scanners. Br. J. Radiol.79, 56–61 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Rybicki FJ, Otero HJ, Steigner ML et al. Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging24, 535–546 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kido T, Kurata A, Higashino H et al. Cardiac imaging using 256-detector row four-dimensional CT: preliminary clinical report. Radiat. Med.25, 38–44 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ruzsics B, Lee H, Powers ER, Flohr TG, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. Images in cardiovascular medicine. Myocardial ischemia diagnosed by dual-energy computed tomography: correlation with single-photon emission computed tomography. Circulation117, 1244–1245 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Ruzsics B, Lee H, Zwerner PL, Gebregziabher M, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. Dual-energy CT of the heart for diagnosing coronary artery stenosis and myocardial ischemia-initial experience. Eur. Radiol.18, 2414–2424 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson TR, Krauss B, Sedlmair M et al. Material differentiation by dual energy CT: initial experience. Eur. Radiol.17, 1510–1517 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flohr TG, Klotz E, Allmendinger T, Raupach R, Bruder H, Schmidt B. Pushing the envelope: new computed tomography techniques for cardiothoracic imaging. J. Thorac. Imaging25, 100–111 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J. A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med. Phys.34, 4526–4544 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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 (ACCF/AHA Writing Committee to Update the 2000 Expert Consensus Document on Electron Beam Computed Tomography). Circulation115, 402–426 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oudkerk M, Stillman AE, Halliburton SS et al. Coronary artery calcium screening: current status and recommendations from the European Society of Cardiac Radiology and North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur. Radiol.18, 2785–2807 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Rumberger JA. Tomographic plaque imaging with CT: technical considerations and capabilities. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis.46, 123–134 (2003).
   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. Circulation114, 1761–1791 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahabadi AA, Bamberg F, Toepker M et al. Association of aortic valve calcification to the presence, extent, and composition of coronary artery plaque burden: from the Rule Out Myocardial Infarction using Computer Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT) trial. Am. Heart J.158, 562–568 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Sun Z, Ng KH. Multislice CT angiography in cardiac imaging. Part II: clinical applications in coronary artery disease. Singapore Med. J.51, 282–289 (2010).
   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.49, 1860–1870 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenland P, LaBree L, Azen SP, Doherty TM, Detrano RC. Coronary artery calcium score combined with Framingham score for risk prediction in asymptomatic individuals. JAMA291, 210–215 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Lin FY, Gidseg DS et al. Determinants of coronary calcium conversion among patients with a normal coronary calcium scan: what is the ‘warranty period’ for remaining normal? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.55, 1110–1117 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raggi P, Gongora MC, Gopal A, Callister TQ, Budoff M, Shaw LJ. Coronary artery calcium to predict all-cause mortality in elderly men and women. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.52, 17–23 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rozanski A, Gransar H, Wong ND et al. Clinical outcomes after both coronary calcium scanning and exercise myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.49, 1352–1361 (2007).
   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.358, 1336–1345 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng VY, Lepor NE, Madyoon H, Eshaghian S, Naraghi AL, Shah PK. Presence and severity of noncalcified coronary plaque on 64-slice computed tomographic coronary angiography in patients with zero and low coronary artery calcium. Am. J. Cardiol.99, 1183–1186 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Henneman MM, Schuijf JD, Pundziute G et al. Noninvasive evaluation with multislice computed tomography in suspected acute coronary syndrome: plaque morphology on multislice computed tomography versus coronary calcium score. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.52, 216–222 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwan M, Ropers D, Pflederer T, Daniel WG, Achenbach S. Clinical characteristics of patients with obstructive coronary lesions in the absence of coronary calcification: an evaluation by coronary CT angiography. Heart95, 1056–1060 (2009).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubinshtein R, Gaspar T, Halon DA, Goldstein J, Peled N, Lewis BS. Prevalence and extent of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients with zero or low calcium score undergoing 64-slice cardiac multidetector computed tomography for evaluation of a chest pain syndrome. Am. J. Cardiol.99, 472–475 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Bijl N, de Bruin PW, Geleijns J et al. Assessment of coronary artery calcium by using volumetric 320-row multi-detector computed tomography: comparison of 0.5 mm with 3.0 mm slice reconstructions. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging26, 473–482 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Budoff MJ, Gul KM. Expert review on coronary calcium. Vasc. Health Risk Manag.4, 315–324 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Polonsky TS, McClelland RL, Jorgensen NW et al. Coronary artery calcium score and risk classification for coronary heart disease prediction. JAMA303, 1610–1616 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PM, de Feyter PJ. Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation106, 2051–2054 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun Z, Jiang W. Diagnostic value of multislice computed tomography angiography in coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Eur. J. Radiol.60, 279–286 (2006).
   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.52, 1724–1732 (2008).
   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.359, 2324–2336 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fine JJ, Hopkins CB, Ruff N, Newton FC. Comparison of accuracy of 64-slice cardiovascular computed tomography with coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Am. J. Cardiol.97, 173–174 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Husmann L, Schepis T, Scheffel H et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with low, intermediate, and high cardiovascular risk. Acad. Radiol.15, 452–461 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64-slice technology: first experience. Eur. Heart J.26, 1482–1487 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ropers U, Ropers D, Pflederer T et al. Influence of heart rate on the diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.50, 2393–2398 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min JK, Feignoux J, Treutenaere J, Laperche T, Sablayrolles J. The prognostic value of multidetector coronary CT angiography for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events: a multicenter observational cohort study. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging26, 721–728 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Husmann L, Gaemperli O, Schepis 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. Imaging24, 895–904 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.46, 552–557 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ropers D, Rixe J, Anders K et al. Usefulness of multidetector row spiral computed tomography with 64- × 0.6-mm collimation and 330-ms rotation for the noninvasive detection of significant coronary artery stenoses. Am. J. Cardiol.97, 343–348 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boll DT, Merkle EM, Paulson EK, Fleiter TR. Coronary stent patency: dual-energy multidetector CT assessment in a pilot study with anthropomorphic phantom. Radiology247, 687–695 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Boll DT, Merkle EM, Paulson EK, Mirza RA, Fleiter TR. Calcified vascular plaque specimens: assessment with cardiac dual-energy multidetector CT in anthropomorphically moving heart phantom. Radiology249, 119–126 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Oncel D, Oncel G, Tastan A. Effectiveness of dual-source CT coronary angiography for the evaluation of coronary artery disease in patients with atrial fibrillation: initial experience. Radiology245, 703–711 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Schoepf UJ, Zwerner PL, Savino G, Herzog C, Kerl JM, Costello P. Coronary CT angiography. Radiology244, 48–63 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Arnoldi E, Gebregziabher M, Schoepf UJ et al. Automated computer-aided stenosis detection at coronary CT angiography: initial experience. Eur. Radiol.20, 1160–1167 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM 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.48, 1475–1497 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs JE, Boxt LM, Desjardins B, Fishman EK, Larson PA, Schoepf J. ACR practice guideline for the performance and interpretation of cardiac computed tomography (CT). J. Am. Coll. Radiol.3, 677–685 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kitagawa K, Choi BW, Chan C et al. ASCI 2010 appropriateness criteria for cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a report of the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging guideline working group. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging26(Suppl. 1), 1–15 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Schoepf UJ, Becker CR, Obuchowski NA et al. Multi-slice computed tomography as a screening tool for colon cancer, lung cancer and coronary artery disease. Eur. Radiol.11, 1975–1985 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder S, Achenbach S, Bengel F 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.29, 531–556 (2008).
   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. Eur. Radiol.17, 2196–2207 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai IC, Choi BW, Chan C 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. Imaging26(Suppl. 1), 1–15 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Henzler T, Hanley M, Arnoldi E, Bastarrika G, Schoepf UJ, Becker HC. Practical strategies for low radiation dose cardiac computed tomography. J. Thorac. Imaging25, 213–220 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Chow BJ, Hoffmann U, Nieman K. Computed tomographic coronary angiography: an alternative to invasive coronary angiography. Can. J. Cardiol.21, 933–940 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haberl R, Tittus J, Bohme E et al. Multislice spiral computed tomographic angiography of coronary arteries in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: an effective filter before catheter angiography? Am. Heart J.149, 1112–1119 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoepf UJ, Becker CR, Ohnesorge BM, Yucel EK. CT of coronary artery disease. Radiology232, 18–37 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onuma Y, Tanabe K, Chihara R et al. Evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts and native coronary arteries using 64-slice multidetector computed tomography. Am. Heart J.154, 519–526 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Lee R, Lim J, Kaw G, Wan G, Ng K, Ho KT. Comprehensive noninvasive evaluation of bypass grafts and native coronary arteries in patients after coronary bypass surgery: accuracy of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography compared with invasive coronary angiography. J. Cardiovasc. Med. (Hagerstown)11, 81–90 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Auguadro C, Manfredi M, Scalise F et al. Multislice computed tomography for the evaluation of coronary bypass grafts and native coronary arteries: comparison with traditional angiography. J. Cardiovasc. Med. (Hagerstown)10, 454–460 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Feuchtner GM, Schachner T, Bonatti J et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-slice computed tomography in evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.189, 574–580 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Nikolaou K, Saam T, Rist C et al. [Pre- and postsurgical diagnostics with dual-source computed tomography in cardiac surgery]. Radiologe47, 310–318 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Newell MC, Henry CR, Sigakis CJ et al. Comparison of safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Am. J. Cardiol.97, 1299–1302 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Funabashi N, Komiyama N, Komuro I. Patency of coronary artery lumen surrounded by metallic stent evaluated by three dimensional volume rendering images using ECG gated multislice computed tomography. Heart89, 388 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Pump H, Mohlenkamp S, Sehnert CA et al. Coronary arterial stent patency: assessment with electron-beam CT. Radiology214, 447–452 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Kruger S, Mahnken AH, Sinha AM et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography for the detection of coronary stent restenosis and patency. Int. J. Cardiol.89, 167–172 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maintz D, Grude M, Fallenberg EM, Heindel W, Fischbach R. Assessment of coronary arterial stents by multislice-CT angiography. Acta Radiol.44, 597–603 (2003).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maintz D, Seifarth H, Raupach R et al. 64-slice multidetector coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 68 different stents. Eur. Radiol.16, 818–826 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Hamon M, Champ-Rigot L, Morello R, Riddell JW, Hamon M. Diagnostic accuracy of in-stent coronary restenosis detection with multislice spiral computed tomography: a meta-analysis. Eur. Radiol.18, 217–225 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pugliese F, Weustink AC, Van Mieghem C et al. Dual source coronary computed tomography angiography for detecting in-stent restenosis. Heart94, 848–854 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Oncel D, Oncel G, Tastan A, Tamci B. Evaluation of coronary stent patency and in-stent restenosis with dual-source CT coronary angiography without heart rate control. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.191, 56–63 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• 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.69, 489–495 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Ghali JK, Liao Y, Simmons B, Castaner A, Cao G, Cooper RS. The prognostic role of left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with or without coronary artery disease. Ann. Intern. Med.117, 831–836 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, Kannel WB, Castelli WP. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N. Engl. J. Med.322, 1561–1566 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manyari DE. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N. Engl. J. Med.323, 1706–1707 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White HD, Norris RM, Brown MA, Brandt PW, Whitlock RM, Wild CJ. Left ventricular end-systolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction. Circulation76, 44–51 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busch S, Johnson TR, Wintersperger BJ et al. Quantitative assessment of left ventricular function with dual-source CT in comparison to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: initial findings. Eur. Radiol.18, 570–575 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Gilard M, Pennec PY, Cornily JC et al. Multi-slice computer tomography of left ventricular function with automated analysis software in comparison with conventional ventriculography. Eur. J. Radiol.59, 270–275 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• van der Vleuten PA, de Jonge GJ, Lubbers DD et al. Evaluation of global left ventricular function assessment by dual-source computed tomography compared with MRI. Eur. Radiol.19, 271–277 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Juergens KU, Grude M, Maintz D et al. Multi-detector row CT of left ventricular function with dedicated analysis software versus MR imaging: initial experience. Radiology230, 403–410 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dirksen MS, Bax JJ, de Roos A et al. Usefulness of dynamic multislice computed tomography of left ventricular function in unstable angina pectoris and comparison with echocardiography. Am. J. Cardiol.90, 1157–1160 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischbach R, Juergens KU, Ozgun M et al. Assessment of regional left ventricular function with multidetector-row computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. Eur. Radiol.17, 1009–1017 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Halliburton SS, Petersilka M, Schvartzman PR, Obuchowski N, White RD. Evaluation of left ventricular dysfunction using multiphasic reconstructions of coronary multi-slice computed tomography data in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease: validation against cine magnetic resonance imaging. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging19, 73–83 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Henneman MM, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW et al. Assessment of global and regional left ventricular function and volumes with 64-slice MSCT: a comparison with 2D echocardiography. J. Nucl. Cardiol.13, 480–487 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M et al. Sixteen-slice spiral CT versus MR imaging for the assessment of left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction. Eur. Radiol.15, 714–720 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pflederer T, Ho KT, Anger T et al. Assessment of regional left ventricular function by dual source computed tomography: interobserver variability and validation to laevocardiography. Eur. J. Radiol.72, 85–91 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Bastarrika G, Arraiza M, De Cecco CN, Mastrobuoni S, Ubilla M, Rabago G. Quantification of left ventricular function and mass in heart transplant recipients using dual-source CT and MRI: initial clinical experience. Eur. Radiol.18, 1784–1790 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Bastarrika G, Arraiza M, De Cecco CN et al. Dual-source CT in heart transplant recipients: quantification of global left ventricular function and mass. J. Thorac. Imaging24, 103–109 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Mahnken AH, Muhlenbruch G, Koos R et al. Automated vs. manual assessment of left ventricular function in cardiac multidetector row computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur. Radiol.16, 1416–1423 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• 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. Circulation109, 14–17 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker CR, Knez A, Ohnesorge B, Schoepf UJ, Reiser MF. Imaging of noncalcified coronary plaques using helical CT with retrospective ECG gating. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.175, 423–424 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F et al. Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography: a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.46, 147–154 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke AP, Farb A, Malcom GT, Liang YH, Smialek J, Virmani R. Coronary risk factors and plaque morphology in men with coronary disease who died suddenly. N. Engl. J. Med.336, 1276–1282 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leber AW, Knez A, White CW et al. Composition of coronary atherosclerotic plaques in patients with acute myocardial infarction and stable angina pectoris determined by contrast-enhanced multislice computed tomography. Am. J. Cardiol.91, 714–718 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libby P. Molecular bases of the acute coronary syndromes. Circulation91, 2844–2850 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheruvu PK, Finn AV, Gardner C et al. Frequency and distribution of thin-cap fibroatheroma and ruptured plaques in human coronary arteries: a pathologic study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.50, 940–949 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kashiwagi M, Tanaka A, Kitabata H et al. Feasibility of noninvasive assessment of thin-cap fibroatheroma by multidetector computed tomography. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging2, 1412–1419 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kashiwagi M, Tanaka A, Kitabata H et al. Relationship between coronary arterial remodeling, fibrous cap thickness and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Circ. J.73, 1291–1295 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Nissen SE, Yock P. Intravascular ultrasound: novel pathophysiological insights and current clinical applications. Circulation103, 604–616 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yabushita H, Bouma BE, Houser SL et al. Characterization of human atherosclerosis by optical coherence tomography. Circulation106, 1640–1645 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujii K, Kawasaki D, Masutani M et al. OCT assessment of thin-cap fibroatheroma distribution in native coronary arteries. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging3, 168–175 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.43, 842–847 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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: a comparative study using intravascular ultrasound. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.47, 672–677 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun J, Zhang Z, Lu B et al. Identification and quantification of coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a comparison of 64-MDCT and intravascular ultrasound. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.190, 748–754 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker CR, Nikolaou K, Muders M et al.Ex vivo coronary atherosclerotic plaque characterization with multi-detector-row CT. Eur. Radiol.13, 2094–2098 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Leber AW, Knez A, Becker A et al. Accuracy of multidetector spiral computed tomography in identifying and differentiating the composition of coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a comparative study with intracoronary ultrasound. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.43, 1241–1247 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moselewski F, Ropers D, Pohle K et al. Comparison of measurement of cross-sectional coronary atherosclerotic plaque and vessel areas by 16-slice multidetector computed tomography versus intravascular ultrasound. Am. J. Cardiol.94, 1294–1297 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chopard R, Boussel L, Motreff P et al. How reliable are 40 MHz IVUS and 64-slice MDCT in characterizing coronary plaque composition? An ex vivo study with histopathological comparison. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging26, 373–383 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Galonska M, Ducke F, Kertesz-Zborilova T, Meyer R, Guski H, Knollmann FD. Characterization of atherosclerotic plaques in human coronary arteries with 16-slice multidetector row computed tomography by analysis of attenuation profiles. Acad. Radiol.15, 222–230 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder S, Kuettner A, Leitritz M et al. Reliability of differentiating human coronary plaque morphology using contrast-enhanced multislice spiral computed tomography: a comparison with histology. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr.28, 449–454 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matter CM, Stuber M, Nahrendorf M. Imaging of the unstable plaque: how far have we got? Eur. Heart J.30, 2566–2574 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chao SP, Law WY, Kuo CJ et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 256-row computed tomographic angiography compared with invasive coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Eur. Heart J. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq072 (2010) (Epub ahead of print).
   Google Scholar
• Korosoglou G, Mueller D, Lehrke S et al. Quantitative assessment of stenosis severity and atherosclerotic plaque composition using 256-slice computed tomography. Eur. Radiol.20, 1841–1850 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Gupta NC, Esterbrooks DJ, Hilleman DE, Mohiuddin SM. Comparison of adenosine and exercise thallium-201 single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging. The GE SPECT Multicenter Adenosine Study Group. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.19, 248–257 (1992).
   Google Scholar
• Miller DD, Verani MS. Current status of myocardial perfusion imaging after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.24, 260–266 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen T, Heo J, Ogilby JD, Iskandrian AS. Single photon emission computed tomography with thallium-201 during adenosine-induced coronary hyperemia: correlation with coronary arteriography, exercise thallium imaging and two-dimensional echocardiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.16, 1375–1383 (1990).
   Google Scholar
• San Roman JA, Vilacosta I, Castillo JA et al. Selection of the optimal stress test for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Heart80, 370–376 (1998).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I et al. Functionally relevant coronary artery disease: comparison of 64-section CT angiography with myocardial perfusion SPECT. Radiology248, 414–423 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hacker M, Jakobs T, Hack N et al. Sixty-four slice spiral CT angiography does not predict the functional relevance of coronary artery stenoses in patients with stable angina. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging34, 4–10 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicol ED, Stirrup J, Reyes E et al. Sixty-four-slice computed tomography coronary angiography compared with myocardial perfusion scintigraphy for the diagnosis of functionally significant coronary stenoses in patients with a low to intermediate likelihood of coronary artery disease. J. Nucl. Cardiol.15, 311–318 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Mahnken AH, Bruners P, Katoh M, Wildberger JE, Gunther RW, Buecker A. Dynamic multi-section CT imaging in acute myocardial infarction: preliminary animal experience. Eur. Radiol.16, 746–752 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Wolfkiel CJ, Ferguson JL, Chomka EV et al. Measurement of myocardial blood flow by ultrafast computed tomography. Circulation76, 1262–1273 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikolaou K, Sanz J, Poon M et al. Assessment of myocardial perfusion and viability from routine contrast-enhanced 16-detector-row computed tomography of the heart: preliminary results. Eur. Radiol.15, 864–871 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi SI, George RT, Schuleri KH, Chun EJ, Lima JA, Lardo AC. Recent developments in wide-detector cardiac computed tomography. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging25(Suppl. 1), 23–29 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Ruzsics B, Chiaramida SA, Schoepf UJ. Images in cardiology: dual-energy computed tomography imaging of myocardial infarction. Heart95, 180 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Ruzsics B, Schwarz F, Schoepf UJ et al. Comparison of dual-energy computed tomography of the heart with single photon emission computed tomography for assessment of coronary artery stenosis and of the myocardial blood supply. Am. J. Cardiol.104, 318–326 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz F, Ruzsics B, Schoepf UJ et al. Dual-energy CT of the heart – principles and protocols. Eur. J. Radiol.68, 423–433 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thilo C, Schoepf UJ, Gordon L, Chiaramida S, Serguson J, Costello P. Integrated assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion using a retractable SPECT camera combined with 64-slice CT: initial experience. Eur. Radiol.19, 845–856 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Bastarrika G, Ramos-Duran L, Rosenblum MA, Kang DK, Rowe GW, Schoepf UJ. Adenosine-stress dynamic myocardial CT perfusion imaging: initial clinical experience. Invest. Radiol.45, 306–313 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bastarrika G, Ramos-Duran L, Schoepf UJ et al. Adenosine-stress dynamic myocardial volume perfusion imaging with second generation dual-source computed tomography: concepts and first experiences. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr.4, 127–135 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Rogers IS, Cury RC, Blankstein R et al. Comparison of postprocessing techniques for the detection of perfusion defects by cardiac computed tomography in patients presenting with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr.4, 258–266 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Baer FM, Theissen P, Schneider CA et al. MRI assessment of myocardial viability: comparison with other imaging techniques. Rays24, 96–108 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Knuuti J, Schelbert HR, Bax JJ. The need for standardisation of cardiac FDG PET imaging in the evaluation of myocardial viability in patients with chronic ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging29, 1257–1266 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Wijns W, Vatner SF, Camici PG. Hibernating myocardium. N. Engl. J. Med.339, 173–181 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim RJ, Fieno DS, Parrish TB et al. Relationship of MRI delayed contrast enhancement to irreversible injury, infarct age, and contractile function. Circulation100, 1992–2002 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin D, Kramer CM. Late gadolinium-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance. Curr. Cardiol. Rep.10, 72–78 (2008).
   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.343, 1445–1453 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwong RY, Chan AK, Brown KA et al. Impact of unrecognized myocardial scar detected by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging on event-free survival in patients presenting with signs or symptoms of coronary artery disease. Circulation113, 2733–2743 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan AT, Shayne AJ, Brown KA et al. Characterization of the peri-infarct zone by contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging is a powerful predictor of post-myocardial infarction mortality. Circulation114, 32–39 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein C, Nekolla SG, Bengel FM et al. Assessment of myocardial viability with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with positron emission tomography. Circulation105, 162–167 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennell DJ, Sechtem UP, Higgins CB et al. Clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR): Consensus Panel report. J. Cardiovasc. Magn. Reson.6, 727–765 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. Circulation113, 823–833 (2006).
   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. Circulation113, 394–404 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baks T, Cademartiri F, Moelker AD et al. Multislice computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of reperfused acute myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.48, 144–152 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodoefel H, Klumpp B, Reimann A et al. Sixty-four-MSCT in the characterization of porcine acute and subacute myocardial infarction: determination of transmurality in comparison to magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology. Eur. J. Radiol.62, 235–246 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahnken AH, Bruners P, Kinzel S et al. Late-phase MSCT in the different stages of myocardial infarction: animal experiments. Eur. Radiol.17, 2310–2317 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nieman K, Shapiro MD, Ferencik M et al. Reperfused myocardial infarction: contrast-enhanced 64-section CT in comparison to MR imaging. Radiology247, 49–56 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanz J, Weeks D, Nikolaou K et al. Detection of healed myocardial infarction with multidetector-row computed tomography and comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance delayed hyperenhancement. Am. J. Cardiol.98, 149–155 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sigal-Cinqualbre AB, Hennequin R, Abada HT, Chen X, Paul JF. Low-kilovoltage multi-detector row chest CT in adults: feasibility and effect on image quality and iodine dose. Radiology231, 169–174 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M et al. Assessment of myocardial viability in reperfused acute myocardial infarction using 16-slice computed tomography in comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.45, 2042–2047 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuettner A, Beck T, Drosch T et al. Image quality and diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive coronary imaging with 16 detector slice spiral computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. Heart91, 938–941 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Krestin GP et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy with 16-row multi-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.45, 128–132 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Schmitz BL et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography. JAMA293, 2471–2478 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achenbach S, Ropers D, Pohle FK et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses using multi-detector CT with 16 × 0.75 collimation and 375 ms rotation. Eur. Heart J.26, 1978–1986 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikolaou K, Knez A, Rist C et al. Accuracy of 64-MDCT in the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.187, 111–117 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chao SP, Law WY, Kuo CJ et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 256-row computed tomographic angiography compared with invasive coronary angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Eur. Heart J.31, 1916–1923 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Dewey M, Zimmermann E, Deissenrieder F et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography by 320-row computed tomography with lower radiation exposure and maintained diagnostic accuracy: comparison of results with cardiac catheterization in a head-to-head pilot investigation. Circulation120, 867–875 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Graaf FR, Schuijf JD, van Velzen JE et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 320-row multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography in the non-invasive evaluation of significant coronary artery disease. Eur. Heart J.31, 1908–1915 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, Busch S et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Invest. Radiol.42, 684–691 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodoefel H, Burgstahler C, Tsiflikas I et al. Dual-source CT: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability, and calcification on image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Radiology247, 346–355 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar