BACKGROUND: Despite rapid advances in cardiac computed tomography (CT), a strategy for optimal visualization of perfusion abnormalities on CT has yet to be validated. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the performance of several postprocessing techniques of source data sets to detect and characterize perfusion defects in acute myocardial infarctions with cardiac CT. METHODS: Twenty-one subjects (18 men; 60 +/- 13 years) that were successfully treated with percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment myocardial infarction underwent 64-slice cardiac CT and 1.5 Tesla cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans after revascularization. Delayed enhancement MR images were analyzed to identify the location of infarcted myocardium. Contiguous short-axis images of the left ventricular myocardium were created from the CT source images with 0.75-mm multiplanar reconstruction (MPR), 5-mm MPR, 5-mm maximal intensity projection (MIP), and 5-mm minimum intensity projection (MinIP) techniques. Segments already confirmed to contain infarction by MRI were then evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively with CT. RESULTS: Overall, 143 myocardial segments were analyzed. On qualitative analysis, the MinIP and thick MPR techniques had greater visibility and definition than the thin MPR and MIP techniques (P < 0.001). On quantitative analysis, the absolute difference in Hounsfield unit attenuation between normal and infarcted segments was significantly greater for the MinIP (65.4 Hounsfield unit [HU]) and thin MPR (61.2 HU) techniques. However, the relative difference in Hounsfield unit attenuation was significantly greatest for the MinIP technique alone (95%; P < 0.001). Contrast to noise was greatest for the MinIP (4.2) and thick MPR (4.1) techniques (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results of our current investigation found that MinIP and thick MPR detected infarcted myocardium with greater visibility and definition than MIP and thin MPR. Copyright 2010 Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Despite rapid advances in cardiac computed tomography (CT), a strategy for optimal visualization of perfusion abnormalities on CT has yet to be validated. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the performance of several postprocessing techniques of source data sets to detect and characterize perfusion defects in acute myocardial infarctions with cardiac CT. METHODS: Twenty-one subjects (18 men; 60 +/- 13 years) that were successfully treated with percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment myocardial infarction underwent 64-slice cardiac CT and 1.5 Tesla cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans after revascularization. Delayed enhancement MR images were analyzed to identify the location of infarcted myocardium. Contiguous short-axis images of the left ventricular myocardium were created from the CT source images with 0.75-mm multiplanar reconstruction (MPR), 5-mm MPR, 5-mm maximal intensity projection (MIP), and 5-mm minimum intensity projection (MinIP) techniques. Segments already confirmed to contain infarction by MRI were then evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively with CT. RESULTS: Overall, 143 myocardial segments were analyzed. On qualitative analysis, the MinIP and thick MPR techniques had greater visibility and definition than the thin MPR and MIP techniques (P < 0.001). On quantitative analysis, the absolute difference in Hounsfield unit attenuation between normal and infarcted segments was significantly greater for the MinIP (65.4 Hounsfield unit [HU]) and thin MPR (61.2 HU) techniques. However, the relative difference in Hounsfield unit attenuation was significantly greatest for the MinIP technique alone (95%; P < 0.001). Contrast to noise was greatest for the MinIP (4.2) and thick MPR (4.1) techniques (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results of our current investigation found that MinIP and thick MPR detected infarcted myocardium with greater visibility and definition than MIP and thin MPR. Copyright 2010 Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Hyun Cheol Kim; Seong Jin Park; Sung Il Park; Sang Heum Park; Hyun Jun Kim; Hyeong Cheol Shin; Won Kyung Bae; Il Young Kim; Hae Kyung Lee Journal: Clin Imaging Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.605
Authors: Andreas H Mahnken; Ralf Koos; Marcus Katoh; Joachim E Wildberger; Elmar Spuentrup; Arno Buecker; Rolf W Günther; Harald P Kühl Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-06-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Dieter Ropers; Johannes Rixe; Katharina Anders; Axel Küttner; Ulrich Baum; Werner Bautz; Werner G Daniel; Stephan Achenbach Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2005-12-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Michel Habis; André Capderou; Saïd Ghostine; Béatrice Daoud; Christophe Caussin; Jean-Yves Riou; Philippe Brenot; Claude Yves Angel; Bernard Lancelin; Jean-François Paul Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-03-06 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Joshua L Busch; Adam M Alessio; James H Caldwell; Mohit Gupta; Songshou Mao; Jigar Kadakia; William Shuman; Matthew J Budoff; Kelley R Branch Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2011-10-24
Authors: Brian B Ghoshhajra; Ian S Rogers; Pal Maurovich-Horvat; Tust Techasith; Daniel Verdini; Manavjot S Sidhu; Nicola K Drzezga; Hector M Medina; Ron Blankstein; Thomas J Brady; Ricardo C Cury Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2011-10-31
Authors: Kelley R Branch; Ryan D Haley; Marcio Sommer Bittencourt; Amit R Patel; Edward Hulten; Ron Blankstein Journal: Cardiovasc Diagn Ther Date: 2017-10
Authors: Marietta S Ambrose; Carolina Valdiviezo; Vishal Mehra; Albert C Lardo; Joao A C Lima; Richard T George Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 2.931
Authors: Kelley R Branch; Janet Busey; Lee M Mitsumori; Jared Strote; James H Caldwell; Joshua H Busch; William P Shuman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: John M Troupis; Alex Karge; Sujith Seneviratne; Arthur Nasis; Eileen C Ang; Brian S Ko; Dee Nandurkar; Eldho Paul; Roland Hilling-Smith; James Cameron Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2013-01-03 Impact factor: 2.357