OBJECTIVES: In this pilot study we explored whether contrast-material bolus propagation time and speed in the pulmonary arteries (PAs) determined by dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (DCE-CT) can distinguish between patients with and without pulmonary hypertension (PH). METHODS: Twenty-three patients (18 with and 5 without PH) were examined with a DCE-CT sequence following their diagnostic or follow-up right-sided heart catheterisation (RHC). X-ray attenuation over time curves were recorded for regions of interest in the main, right and left PA and fitted with a spline fit. Contrast material bolus propagation speeds and time differences between the peak concentrations were compared with haemodynamic parameters from RHC. RESULTS: Bolus speed correlated (ρ = -0.55) with mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) and showed a good discriminative power between patients with and without PH (cut-off speed 317 mm/s; sensitivity 100%/specificity 100%). Additionally, time differences between peaks correlated with mPAP (ρ = 0.64 and 0.49 for right and left PA, respectively) and discrimination was achieved with sensitivity 100%/specificity 100% (cut-off time 0.15 s) and sensitivity 93 %/specificity 80% (cut-off time 0.45 s), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Bolus propagation speed and time differences between contrast material peaks in the PA can identify PH. This method could be used to confirm the indication for RHC in patients screened for pulmonary hypertension. KEY POINTS: • Dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) can identify patients with pulmonary hypertension. • Bolus propagation speed in the pulmonary artery is reduced in pulmonary hypertension. • Peak-contrast propagation times provide a practical surrogate for speed. • This non-invasive technique could serve as a screening method for pulmonary hypertension. • Invasive right-sided heart catheterisations might be restricted to a smaller group of patients.
OBJECTIVES: In this pilot study we explored whether contrast-material bolus propagation time and speed in the pulmonary arteries (PAs) determined by dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (DCE-CT) can distinguish between patients with and without pulmonary hypertension (PH). METHODS: Twenty-three patients (18 with and 5 without PH) were examined with a DCE-CT sequence following their diagnostic or follow-up right-sided heart catheterisation (RHC). X-ray attenuation over time curves were recorded for regions of interest in the main, right and left PA and fitted with a spline fit. Contrast material bolus propagation speeds and time differences between the peak concentrations were compared with haemodynamic parameters from RHC. RESULTS: Bolus speed correlated (ρ = -0.55) with mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) and showed a good discriminative power between patients with and without PH (cut-off speed 317 mm/s; sensitivity 100%/specificity 100%). Additionally, time differences between peaks correlated with mPAP (ρ = 0.64 and 0.49 for right and left PA, respectively) and discrimination was achieved with sensitivity 100%/specificity 100% (cut-off time 0.15 s) and sensitivity 93 %/specificity 80% (cut-off time 0.45 s), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Bolus propagation speed and time differences between contrast material peaks in the PA can identify PH. This method could be used to confirm the indication for RHC in patients screened for pulmonary hypertension. KEY POINTS: • Dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) can identify patients with pulmonary hypertension. • Bolus propagation speed in the pulmonary artery is reduced in pulmonary hypertension. • Peak-contrast propagation times provide a practical surrogate for speed. • This non-invasive technique could serve as a screening method for pulmonary hypertension. • Invasive right-sided heart catheterisations might be restricted to a smaller group of patients.
Authors: Gérald Simonneau; Ivan M Robbins; Maurice Beghetti; Richard N Channick; Marion Delcroix; Christopher P Denton; C Gregory Elliott; Sean P Gaine; Mark T Gladwin; Zhi-Cheng Jing; Michael J Krowka; David Langleben; Norifumi Nakanishi; Rogério Souza Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-06-30 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Santo Dellegrottaglie; Javier Sanz; Michael Poon; Juan F Viles-Gonzalez; Roxana Sulica; Martin Goyenechea; Frank Macaluso; Valentin Fuster; Sanjay Rajagopalan Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Michael Pienn; Gabor Kovacs; Maria Tscherner; Thorsten R Johnson; Peter Kullnig; Rudolf Stollberger; Andrea Olschewski; Horst Olschewski; Zoltán Bálint Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2013-08-23 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Andrew J Swift; Smitha Rajaram; Robin Condliffe; Dave Capener; Judith Hurdman; Charlie Elliot; David G Kiely; Jim M Wild Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Danilo Tadao Wada; Adriana Ignácio de Pádua; Moyses Oliveira Lima Filho; José Antonio Marin Neto; Jorge Elias Júnior; José Baddini-Martinez; Marcel Koenigkam Santos Journal: Radiol Bras Date: 2017 Nov-Dec
Authors: David G Kiely; David Levin; Paul Hassoun; David D Ivy; Pei-Ni Jone; Jumaa Bwika; Steven M Kawut; Jim Lordan; Angela Lungu; Jeremy Mazurek; Shahin Moledina; Horst Olschewski; Andrew Peacock; Goverdhan Dutt Puri; Farbod Rahaghi; Michal Schafer; Mark Schiebler; Nicholas Screaton; Merryn Tawhai; Edwin Jr Van Beek; Anton Vonk-Noordegraaf; Rebecca R Vanderpool; John Wort; Lan Zhao; Jim Wild; Jens Vogel-Claussen; Andrew J Swift Journal: Pulm Circ Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 3.017
Authors: Roman Johannes Gertz; Felix Gerhardt; Jan Robert Kröger; Rahil Shahzad; Liliana Caldeira; Jonathan Kottlors; Nils Große Hokamp; David Maintz; Stephan Rosenkranz; Alexander Christian Bunck Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-02-28