of PVL as compared to echocardiography [106, 107] and severity of PVL on CMR has been shown to be associated with increased mortality [108].
Both MSCT and CVR techniques can be utilized in combination in “no contrast” imaging for certain preprocedure planning in patients with severe renal failure. For example, a non‐contrast gated MSCT of the aortic valve/annulus and the aortoiliac arterial beds can be combined with non contrast cardiac MR and no‐contrast MR‐angiogram of aortoiliac segments to assess sizing and calcification extent in TAVR planning.
Interventional CMR
Research in interventional CMR has been ongoing because of its potential to guide procedures with greater accuracy and in a radiation‐free environment. MR‐guided right heart catheterization and interventions such as femoral and popliteal angioplasty have successfully been performed. As interventional CMR rapidly advances, it will play a key role in interventions that are more complex in the future [109].
Conclusions
Cardiac CT and MRI are excellent imaging modalities with their own unique strengths and limitations. They have found wide application in the assessment of cardiovascular conditions and are an integral part of the multimodality planning of cardiac interventional procedures.
Interactive multiple choice questions are available for this chapter on www.wiley.com/go/dangas/cardiology
References
1 1 Zipes DP, Libby P, Bonow RO, et al. Braunwald's heart disease: a textbook of cardiovascular medicine. 2019. Elsevier Science. Philadelphia.
2 2 Bischoff B, Hein F, Meyer T, et al. Comparison of sequential and helical scanning for radiation dose and image quality: results of the Prospective Multicenter Study on Radiation Dose Estimates of Cardiac CT Angiography (PROTECTION) I Study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 194(6):1495–9.
3 3 Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H, et al. First performance evaluation of a dual‐source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol. 2006; 16(2):256–68.
4 4 Achenbach S, Ropers D, Pohle FK, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenoses using multi‐detector CT with 16 x 0.75 collimation and 375 ms rotation. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26(19):1978–86.
5 5 Dewey M, Teige F, Schnapauff D, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary artery stenoses with multislice computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Intern Med. 2006; 145(6):407–15.
6 6 Garcia MJ, Lessick J, Hoffmann MH. Accuracy of 16‐row multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis. JAMA. 2006; 296(4):403–11.
7 7 Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Non‐invasive coronary computed tomographic angiography for patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the Coronary Angiography by Computed Tomography with the Use of a Submillimeter resolution (CACTUS) trial. Eur Heart J. 2007; 28(24):3034–41.
8 8 Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Schmitz BL, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography. JAMA. 2005; 293(20):2471–8.
9 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(1):147–54.
10 10 Leschka S, Alkadhi H, Plass A, et al. Accuracy of MSCT coronary angiography with 64‐slice technology: first experience. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26(15):1482–7.
11 11 Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Krestin GP, et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy with 16‐row multi‐slice computed tomography coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 45(1):128–32.
12 12 Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, Nieman K, et al. Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 43(12):2265–70.
13 13 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.
14 14 Nikolaou K, Knez A, Rist C, et al. Accuracy of 64‐MDCT in the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 187(1):111–7.
15 15 Nikolaou K, Saam T, Rist C, et al. [Pre‐ and postsurgical diagnostics with dual‐source computed tomography in cardiac surgery]. Radiologe. 2007; 47(4):310–8.
16 16 Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Runza G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of non‐invasive 64‐slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Radiol. 2006; 16(3):575–82.
17 17 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(3):552–7.
18 18 Ropers D, Rixe J, Anders K, et al. Usefulness of multidetector row spiral computed tomography with 64‐ x 0.6‐mm collimation and 330‐ms rotation for the noninvasive detection of significant coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol. 2006; 97(3):343–8.
19 19 Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Plass A, t al. Accuracy of dual‐source CT coronary angiography: First experience in a high pre‐test probability population without heart rate control. Eur Radiol. 2006; 16(12):2739–47.
20 20 Weustink AC, Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, et al. Reliable high‐speed coronary computed tomography in symptomatic patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 50(8):786–94.
21 21 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.
22 22 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.
23 23 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.
24 24 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. 2006; 48(7):1475–97.
25 25 Van Mieghem CA, Thury A, Meijboom WB, et al. Detection and characterization of coronary bifurcation lesions with 64‐slice computed tomography coronary angiography. Eur Heart J. 2007; 28(16):1968–76.
26 26 Wolny R, Pregowski J, Kruk M, t al. Computed tomography angiography versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary interventions in bifurcation lesions ‐ A prospective randomized pilot study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2017; 11(2):119–28.
27 27
