Dual-energy CT of the heart

American Journal of Roentgenology (Impact Factor: 2.73). 11/2012; 199(5). DOI: 10.2214/AJR.12.9208


Interest in dual-energy CT (DECT) for evaluating the myocardial blood supply, as an addition to coronary artery assessment, is increasing. Although it is still in the early clinical phase, assessment of myocardial ischemia and infarction by DECT constitutes a promising step toward comprehensive evaluation of coronary artery disease with a single noninvasive modality.

Compared with dynamic CT approaches, DECT has advantages regarding radiation dose and clinical applicability. In this review, the literature on DECT of the heart is discussed.

1 Follower
31 Reads
  • Source
    • "By obtaining CT data at high and low X-ray energies, dual energy CT can provide both electron density (í µí¼Œ í µí±’ ) and effective atomic number (í µí± eff ), thus facilitating tissue type identification . It has been a hot topic in both research and application in the diagnosis field [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16]. However, the advantages of dual energy CBCT in radiotherapy need to be further researched. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose . To develop a dual energy imaging method to improve the accuracy of electron density measurement with a cone-beam CT (CBCT) device. Materials and Methods . The imaging system is the XVI CBCT system on Elekta Synergy linac. Projection data were acquired with the high and low energy X-ray, respectively, to set up a basis material decomposition model. Virtual phantom simulation and phantoms experiments were carried out for quantitative evaluation of the method. Phantoms were also scanned twice with the high and low energy X-ray, respectively. The data were decomposed into projections of the two basis material coefficients according to the model set up earlier. The two sets of decomposed projections were used to reconstruct CBCT images of the basis material coefficients. Then, the images of electron densities were calculated with these CBCT images. Results . The difference between the calculated and theoretical values was within 2% and the correlation coefficient of them was about 1.0. The dual energy imaging method obtained more accurate electron density values and reduced the beam hardening artifacts obviously. Conclusion . A novel dual energy CBCT imaging method to calculate the electron densities was developed. It can acquire more accurate values and provide a platform potentially for dose calculation.
    09/2015; 2015(12):858907. DOI:10.1155/2015/858907
  • Source
    • "Hyperenhanced myocardial areas on delayed CT images may represent scar tissue caused by myocardial infarction. However, the contrast-to-noise ratio between the infarcted region and the normal myocardium is limited compared with CMR delayed enhancement imaging [52] [71]. One study suggested that delayed enhancement CT does not add incremental diagnostic value to CTP. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Coronary CT angiography (CCTA) has become an important noninvasive imaging modality in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). CCTA enables accurate evaluation of coronary artery stenosis. However, CCTA provides limited information on the physiological significance of stenotic lesions. A noninvasive "one-stop-shop" diagnostic test that can provide both anatomical significance and functional significance of stenotic lesions would be beneficial in the diagnosis and management of CAD. Recently, with the introduction of novel techniques, such as myocardial CT perfusion, CT-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT), and transluminal attenuation gradient (TAG), CCTA has emerged as a noninvasive method for the assessment of both anatomy of coronary lesions and its physiological consequences during a single study. This review provides an overview of the current status of new CT techniques for the physiologic assessments of CAD.
    BioMed Research International 01/2015; 2015:435737. DOI:10.1155/2015/435737 · 2.71 Impact Factor
  • American Journal of Roentgenology 11/2012; 199(5). DOI:10.2214/AJR.12.9119 · 2.73 Impact Factor
Show more