Korean Circ J.  2007 May;37(5):191-195. 10.4070/kcj.2007.37.5.191.

Multi-Detector Computed Tomography for Assessing the Left Ventricular Function, Perfusion and Viability

• Lim SJ
• Choo KS

• KMID: 2227063
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2007.37.5.191

Abstract

MDCT has recently been used as a diagnostic tool to evaluate coronary artery stenosis and to detect coronary artery anomalies. The accuracy of MDCT has improved the assessment of stenosis as the number of detectors has increased. In addition to its excellent role in evaluating coronary artery stenosis, MDCT can provide information regarding the left ventricular function without having to perform additional scanning, and the myocardial viability of the left ventricle can be assessed on a delayed scan. MDCT has several disadvantages such as the amount of radiation exposure and the use of an iodine contrast medium, which might cause an adverse reaction, when combined with the reconstruction of the systolic and diastolic phases and the delayed scan. Yet MDCT may provide the opportunity to evaluate the coronary anatomy, the left ventricular function and the tissue characterization in one single imaging session that lasts less than 15 minutes.

Keyword

X-ray tomography, computed; Myocardium; Infarction

MeSH Terms

Constriction, Pathologic
Coronary Stenosis
Coronary Vessels
Heart Ventricles
Infarction
Iodine
Myocardium
Perfusion*
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
Ventricular Function, Left*
Iodine

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 This screen-shot from a Wizard workstation (Siemens, Forchheim, Germany) shows the endocardial and epicardial borders of both the end-diastolic and the end-systolic phases; these were traced semi-automatically in the short axis orientation, by using dedicated analysis software, for evaluating the left ventricular function.

• 

  Fig. 2 In this acute MI case, the findings on the early- and late-phase CT images (perfusion defect on the early phase (black arrow) and delayed hyperenhancement (white arrow) and persistent perfusion defect (red arrow) in the papillary muscle) were well correlated with those findings on the perfusion and delayed MR images and on color-coded CT images, and so they helped to assess the infarcted area. CT: computed tomography, MI: myocardiac infaretic, MR: magnets resonance imaging.

Reference

1. Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Alternative projections of mortality and disability by cause 1990-2020. Lancet. 1997. 349:1498–1504.

2. 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. Circulation. 1987. 76:44–51.

3. Hammermeister KE, DeRouen TA, Dodge HT. Variables predictive of survival in patients with coronary disease: selection by univariate and multivariate analyses from the clinical, electrocardiographic, exercise, arteriographic, and quantitative angiographic evaluations. Circulation. 1979. 59:421–430.

4. The Multicenter Postinfarction Research Group. Risk stratification and survival after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1983. 309:331–336.

5. Nikolaou K, Knez A, Sagmeister S, et al. Assessment of myocardial infarctions using multidetector-row computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2004. 28:286–292.

6. Kim RJ, Fieno DS, Parrish TB, et al. Relationship of MRI delayed contrast enhancement to irreversible injury, infarct age, and contractile function. Circulation. 1999. 100:1992–2002.

7. Kitagawa K, Sakuma H, Hirano T, Okamoto S, Makino K, Takeda K. Acute myocardial infarction: myocardial viability assessment in patients early thereafter comparison of contrast-enhanced MR imaging with resting (201)Tl SPECT: single photon emission computed tomography. Radiology. 2003. 226:138–144.

8. 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.

9. 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. 2005. 46:147–154.

10. Orakzai SH, Orakzai RH, Nasir K, Budoff MJ. Assessment of cardiac function using multidetector row computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006. 30:555–563.

11. 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. Radiology. 2004. 230:403–410.

12. Kim TH, Hur J, Kim SJ, et al. Two-phase reconstruction for the assessment of left ventricular volume and function using retrospective ECG-gated MDCT: comparison with echocardiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005. 185:319–325.

13. Greenberg SB, Sandhu SK. Ventricular function. Radiol Clin North Am. 1999. 37:341–359.

14. Pattynama PM, Lamb HJ, van der Velde EA, van der Wall EE, de Roos A. Left ventricular measurements with cine and spin-echo MR imaging: a study of reproducibility with variance component analysis. Radiology. 1993. 187:261–268.

15. Bellenger NG, Burgess MI, Ray SG, et al. Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance: are they interchangeable? Eur Heart J. 2000. 21:1387–1396.

16. Grude M, Juergens KU, Wichter T, et al. Evaluation of global left ventricular myocardial function with electrocardiogram-gated multidetector computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 2003. 38:653–661.

17. Ritchie CJ, Godwin JD, Crawford CR, Stanford W, Anno H, Kim Y. Minimum scan speeds for suppression of motion artifacts in CT. Radiology. 1992. 185:37–42.

18. Jakobs TF, Becker CR, Ohnesorge B, et al. Multislice helical CT of the heart with retrospective ECG gating: reduction of radiation exposure by ECG-controlled tube current modulation. Eur Radiol. 2002. 12:1081–1086.

19. Gerber TC, Stratmann BP, Kuzo RS, Kantor B, Morin RL. Effect of acquisition technique on radiation dose and image quality in multidetector row computed tomography coronary angiography with submillimeter collimation. Invest Radiol. 2005. 40:556–563.

20. Schroeder S, Kopp AF, Kuettner A, et al. Influence of heart rate on vessel visibility in noninvasive coronary angiography using new multislice computed tomography: experience in 94 patients. Clin Imaging. 2002. 26:106–111.

21. Ropers D, Baum U, Pohle K, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses with thin-slice multi-detector row spiral computed tomography and multiplanar reconstruction. Circulation. 2003. 107:664–666.

22. Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PM, de Feyter PJ. Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation. 2002. 106:2051–2054.

23. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Kuettner A, et al. Contrast-enhanced coronary artery visualization by dual-source computed tomography: initial experience. Eur J Radiol. 2006. 57:331–335.

24. Chang HJ, Choi SI. Era of multimodality imaging: where do we stand? Korean Circ J. 2006. 36:717–722.

25. Jung SE, Youn HJ, Lee KH, Hahn ST, Hong SJ, Kim CY. Usefulness of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the prediction of myocardial viability after acute myocardial infarction. Korean Circ J. 2000. 30:1257–1263.

26. Park YH, Kim JH, Jung JH, et al. The meaning of pathologic Q wave in myocardial infarction assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. Korean Circ J. 2004. 34:945–952.

27. Song SG, Kim JH, Kim CW, et al. The diagnostic usefulness of cardiovscular magnetic resonance imaging for non-ischemic myocardial injury: the value of the endocardial sparing pattern on delayed enhancement. Korean Circ J. 2004. 34:1174–1181.

28. Huber DJ, Lapray JF, Hessel SJ. In vivo evaluation of experimental myocardial infarcts by ungated computed tomography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981. 136:469–473.

29. Adams DF, Hessel SJ, Judy PF, Stein JA, Abrams HL. Computed tomography of the normal and infarcted myocardium. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1976. 126:786–791.

30. Kramer PH, Goldstein JA, Herkens RJ, Lipton MJ, Brundage BH. Imaging of acute myocardial infarction in man with contrast-enhanced computed transmission tomography. Am Heart J. 1984. 108:1514–1523.

31. Masuda Y, Yoshida H, Morooka N, Watanabe S, Inagaki Y. The usefulness of x-ray computed tomography for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1984. 70:217–225.

32. Georgiou D, Bleiweis M, Brundage BH. Conventional and ultrafast computed tomography in the detection of viable versus infarcted myocardium. Am J Card Imaging. 1992. 6:228–236.

33. Ko SM, Seo JB, Hong MK, et al. Myocardial enhancement pattern in patients with acute myocardial infarction on two-phase contrast-enhanced ECG-gated multidetector-row computed tomography. Clin Radiol. 2006. 61:417–422.

34. 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.

35. Mutzel W, Speck U, Weinmann HJ. Pharmacokinetics of iopromide in rat and dog. Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd. 1983. 118:85–90.

36. Allard M, Doucet D, Kien P, Bonnemain B, Caille JM. Experimental study of DOTA-gadolinium: pharmacokinetics and pharmacologic properties. Invest Radiol. 1988. 23:Suppl. S271–S274.

37. Gould KL, Lipscomb K. Effects of coronary stenoses on coronary flow reserve and resistance. Am J Cardiol. 1974. 34:48–55.

38. Kurata A, Mochizuki T, Koyama Y, et al. Perfusion imaging using adenosine triphosphate stress multi-slice spiral computed tomography: alternative to stress myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Circ J. 2005. 69:550–557.

39. Koyama Y, Mochizuki T, Higaki J. Computed tomography assessment of myocardial perfusion, viability, and function. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004. 19:800–815.

40. Gerber BL, Garot J, Bluemke DA, Wu KC, Lima JA. Accuracy of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in predicting improvement of regional myocardial function in patients after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2002. 106:1083–1089.

41. 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. 343:1445–1453.

42. Gerber BL, Rochitte CE, Melin JA, et al. Microvascular obstruction and left ventricular remodeling early after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2000. 101:2734–2741.

43. Wu K, Zerhouni EA, Judd R, et al. Prognostic significance of microvascular obstruction by magnetic resonance imaging in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1998. 97:765–772.