J Korean Soc Radiol.  2011 Sep;65(3):303-315.

Korean Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Guidelines for Cardiac Computed Tomography

• Kim YJ
• Yong HS
• Choi BW
• Kim YM
• Choe YH
• Lim TH
• Park JH
• Choe KO

Abstract

The Korean Society of Cardiovascular Imaging (KOCSI) has issued a guideline for the use of cardiac CT imaging in order to assist clinicians and patients in providing adequate level of medical service. In order to establish a guideline founded on evidence based medicine, it was designed based on comprehensive data such as questionnaires conducted in international and domestic hospitals, intensive journal reviews, and with experts in cardiac radiology. The recommendations of this guideline should not be used as an absolute standard and medical professionals can always refer to methods non-adherent to this guideline when it is considered more reasonable and beneficial to an individual patient's medical situation. The guideline has its limitation and should be revised appropriately with the advancement medical equipment technology and public health care system. The guideline should not be served as a measure for standard of care. KOCSI strongly disapproves the use of the guideline to be used as the standard of expected practice in medical litigation processes.

MeSH Terms

Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
Jurisprudence
Public Health
Surveys and Questionnaires
Standard of Care

Reference

1. Kerl JM, Ravenel JG, Nguyen SA, Suranyi P, Thilo C, Costello P, et al. Right heart: split-bolus injection of diluted contrast medium for visualization at coronary CT angiography. Radiology. 2008; 247:356–364.

2. Jacobs JE, Boxt LM, Desjardins B, Fishman EK, Larson PA, Schoepf J. American College of Radiology. ACR practice guideline for the performance and interpretation of cardiac computed tomography (CT). J Am Coll Radiol. 2006; 3:677–685.

3. Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM, Mitsumori LM, Lockhart DW, Dubinsky TJ, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology. 2008; 248:431–437.

4. Earls JP, Berman EL, Urban BA, Curry CA, Lane JL, Jennings RS, et al. Prospectively gated transverse coronary CT angiography versus retrospectively gated helical technique: improved image quality and reduced radiation dose. Radiology. 2008; 246:742–753.

5. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, Huber E, Zankl M, Martinoff S, et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation. 2006; 113:1305–1310.

6. Schoepf UJ, Zwerner PL, Savino G, Herzog C, Kerl JM, Costello P. Coronary CT angiography. Radiology. 2007; 244:48–63.

7. Siegel MJ, Schmidt B, Bradley D, Suess C, Hildebolt C. Radiation dose and image quality in pediatric CT: effect of technical factors and phantom size and shape. Radiology. 2004; 233:515–522.

8. ASCI CCT & CMR Guideline Working Group. Jinzaki M, Kitagawa K, Tsai IC, Chan C, Yu W, Yong HS, et al. ASCI 2010 contrast media guideline for cardiac imaging: a report of the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging guideline working group. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010; 26:203–212.

9. Hamon M, Morello R, Riddell JW, Hamon M. Coronary arteries: diagnostic performance of 16- versus 64-section spiral CT compared with invasive coronary angiography--meta-analysis. Radiology. 2007; 245:720–731.

10. Vanhoenacker PK, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Van Heste R, Decramer I, Van Hoe LR, Wijns W, et al. Diagnostic performance of multidetector CT angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease: meta-analysis. Radiology. 2007; 244:419–428.

11. Sun Z, Lin C, Davidson R, Dong C, Liao Y. Diagnostic value of 64-slice CT angiography in coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol. 2008; 67:78–84.

12. Stein PD, Yaekoub AY, Matta F, Sostman HD. 64-slice CT for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Am J Med. 2008; 121:715–725.

13. Mowatt G, Cook JA, Hillis GS, Walker S, Fraser C, Jia X, et al. 64-Slice computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis and assessment of coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart. 2008; 94:1386–1393.

14. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, Zankl M, Gerein P, Dörrler K, 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; 28:3034–3041.

15. Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, Gitter M, Sutherland J, Halamert E, 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; 52:1724–1732.

16. Maffei E, Palumbo A, Martini C, Meijboom W, Tedeschi C, Spagnolo P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in a large population of patients without revascularisation: registry data and review of multicentre trials. Radiol Med. 2010; 115:368–384.

17. Marano R, De Cobelli F, Floriani I, Becker C, Herzog C, Centonze M, et al. Italian multicenter, prospective study to evaluate the negative predictive value of 16- and 64-slice MDCT imaging in patients scheduled for coronary angiography (NIMISCAD-Non Invasive Multicenter Italian Study for Coronary Artery Disease). Eur Radiol. 2009; 19:1114–1123.

18. Meijboom WB, Meijs MF, Schuijf JD, Cramer MJ, Mollet NR, van Mieghem CA, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52:2135–2144.

19. Miller JM, Dewey M, Vavere AL, Rochitte CE, Niinuma H, Arbab-Zadeh A, et al. Coronary CT angiography using 64 detector rows: methods and design of the multi-centre trial CORE-64. Eur Radiol. 2009; 19:816–828.

20. Leber AW, Johnson T, Becker A, von Ziegler F, Tittus J, Nikolaou K, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dual-source multi-slice CT-coronary angiography in patients with an intermediate pretest likelihood for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2007; 28:2354–2360.

21. Busch S, Johnson TR, Nikolaou K, von Ziegler F, Knez A, Reiser MF, et al. Visual and automatic grading of coronary artery stenoses with 64-slice CT angiography in reference to invasive angiography. Eur Radiol. 2007; 17:1445–1451.

22. Husmann L, Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Scheffel H, Valenta I, Hoefflinghaus T, et al. Accuracy of quantitative coronary angiography with computed tomography and its dependency on plaque composition: plaque composition and accuracy of cardiac CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008; 24:895–904.

23. Husmann L, Schepis T, Scheffel H, Gaemperli O, Leschka S, Valenta I, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with low, intermediate, and high cardiovascular risk. Acad Radiol. 2008; 15:452–461.

24. Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CA, Mollet NR, Pugliese F, Weustink AC, van Pelt N, et al. 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with high, intermediate, or low pretest probability of significant coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 50:1469–1475.

25. Ong TK, Chin SP, Liew CK, Chan WL, Seyfarth MT, Liew HB, et al. Accuracy of 64-row multidetector computed tomography in detecting coronary artery disease in 134 symptomatic patients: influence of calcification. Am Heart J. 2006; 151:1323.

26. 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.

27. Musto C, Simon P, Nicol E, Tanigawa J, Davies SW, Oldershaw PJ, et al. 64-multislice computed tomography in consecutive patients with suspected or proven coronary artery disease: initial single center experience. Int J Cardiol. 2007; 114:90–97.

28. Brodoefel H, Reimann A, Burgstahler C, Schumacher F, Herberts T, Tsiflikas I, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography using 64-slice spiral computed tomography in an unselected patient collective: effect of heart rate, heart rate variability and coronary calcifications on image quality and diagnostic accuracy. Eur J Radiol. 2008; 66:134–141.

29. Stolzmann P, Scheffel H, Leschka S, Plass A, Baumüller S, Marincek B, et al. Influence of calcifications on diagnostic accuracy of coronary CT angiography using prospective ECG triggering. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 191:1684–1689.

30. Leschka S, Wildermuth S, Boehm T, Desbiolles L, Husmann L, Plass A, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with 64-section CT: effect of average heart rate and heart rate variability on image quality. Radiology. 2006; 241:378–385.

31. Leschka S, Scheffel H, Husmann L, Gämperli O, Marincek B, Kaufmann PA, et al. Effect of decrease in heart rate variability on the diagnostic accuracy of 64-MDCT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 190:1583–1590.

32. Meijboom WB, Van Mieghem CA, van Pelt N, Weustink A, Pugliese F, Mollet NR, et al. Comprehensive assessment of coronary artery stenoses: computed tomography coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography and correlation with fractional flow reserve in patients with stable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52:636–643.

33. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I, Koepfli P, Husmann L, Scheffel H, et al. Functionally relevant coronary artery disease: comparison of 64-section CT angiography with myocardial perfusion SPECT. Radiology. 2008; 248:414–423.

34. Schuijf JD, Wijns W, Jukema JW, Atsma DE, de Roos A, Lamb HJ, et al. Relationship between noninvasive coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 48:2508–2514.

35. Scholte AJ, Schuijf JD, Kharagjitsingh AV, Dibbets-Schneider P, Stokkel MP, Jukema JW, et al. Different manifestations of coronary artery disease by stress SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging, coronary calcium scoring, and multislice CT coronary angiography in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Nucl Cardiol. 2008; 15:503–509.

36. Sun J, Zhang Z, Lu B, Yu W, Yang Y, Zhou Y, et al. Identification and quantification of coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a comparison of 64-MDCT and intravascular ultrasound. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 190:748–754.

37. Gregory SA, Ferencik M, Achenbach S, Yeh RW, Hoffmann U, Inglessis I, et al. Comparison of sixty-four-slice multidetector computed tomographic coronary angiography to coronary angiography with intravascular ultrasound for the detection of transplant vasculopathy. Am J Cardiol. 2006; 98:877–884.

38. Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, Becker A, Nikolaou K, Paul S, 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.

39. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Nieman K, Jang IK, Ferencik M, Rahman AM, et al. Noninvasive assessment of plaque morphology and composition in culprit and stable lesions in acute coronary syndrome and stable lesions in stable angina by multidetector computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 47:1655–1662.

40. Huang WC, Wu MT, Chiou KR, Mar GY, Hsiao SH, Lin SK, et al. Assessing culprit lesions and active complex lesions in patients with early acute myocardial infarction by multidetector computed tomography. Circ J. 2008; 72:1806–1813.

41. Nakazawa G, Tanabe K, Onuma Y, Yachi S, Aoki J, Yamamoto H, et al. Efficacy of culprit plaque assessment by 64-slice multidetector computed tomography to predict transient no-reflow phenomenon during percutaneous coronary intervention. Am Heart J. 2008; 155:1150–1157.

42. Motoyama S, Kondo T, Sarai M, Sugiura A, Harigaya H, Sato T, et al. Multislice computed tomographic characteristics of coronary lesions in acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 50:319–326.

43. Motoyama S, Sarai M, Harigaya H, Anno H, Inoue K, Hara T, et al. Computed tomographic angiography characteristics of atherosclerotic plaques subsequently resulting in acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009; 54:49–57.

44. Tanaka A, Shimada K, Yoshida K, Jissyo S, Tanaka H, Sakamoto M, et al. Non-invasive assessment of plaque rupture by 64-slice multidetector computed tomography--comparison with intravascular ultrasound. Circ J. 2008; 72:1276–1281.

45. Choi BJ, Kang DK, Tahk SJ, Choi SY, Yoon MH, Lim HS, et al. Comparison of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography with spectral analysis of intravascular ultrasound backscatter signals for characterizations of noncalcified coronary arterial plaques. Am J Cardiol. 2008; 102:988–993.

46. Dey D, Schepis T, Marwan M, Slomka PJ, Berman DS, Achenbach S. Automated three-dimensional quantification of noncalcified coronary plaque from coronary CT angiography: comparison with intravascular US. Radiology. 2010; 257:516–522.

47. Hecht HS, Zaric M, Jelnin V, Lubarsky L, Prakash M, Roubin G. Usefulness of 64-detector computed tomographic angiography for diagnosing in-stent restenosis in native coronary arteries. Am J Cardiol. 2008; 101:820–824.

48. Carrabba N, Bamoshmoosh M, Carusi LM, Parodi G, Valenti R, Migliorini A, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography for detecting drug eluting in-stent restenosis. Am J Cardiol. 2007; 100:1754–1758.

49. Carbone I, Francone M, Algeri E, Granatelli A, Napoli A, Kirchin MA, et al. Non-invasive evaluation of coronary artery stent patency with retrospectively ECG-gated 64-slice CT angiography. Eur Radiol. 2008; 18:234–243.

50. Das KM, El-Menyar AA, Salam AM, Singh R, Dabdoob WA, Albinali HA, et al. Contrast-enhanced 64-section coronary multidetector CT angiography versus conventional coronary angiography for stent assessment. Radiology. 2007; 245:424–432.

51. Schuijf JD, Pundziute G, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Tuinenburg JC, van der Hoeven BL, et al. Evaluation of patients with previous coronary stent implantation with 64-section CT. Radiology. 2007; 245:416–423.

52. Oncel D, Oncel G, Karaca M. Coronary stent patency and in-stent restenosis: determination with 64-section multidetector CT coronary angiography--initial experience. Radiology. 2007; 242:403–409.

53. Rixe J, Achenbach S, Ropers D, Baum U, Kuettner A, Ropers U, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent restenosis by 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27:2567–2572.

54. Cademartiri F, Schuijf JD, Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Jukema JW, Maffei E, et al. Usefulness of 64-slice multislice computed tomography coronary angiography to assess in-stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 49:2204–2210.

55. Ehara M, Kawai M, Surmely JF, Matsubara T, Terashima M, Tsuchikane E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of coronary in-stent restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography: comparison with invasive coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 49:951–959.

56. Rist C, von Ziegler F, Nikolaou K, Kirchin MA, Wintersperger BJ, Johnson TR, et al. Assessment of coronary artery stent patency and restenosis using 64-slice computed tomography. Acad Radiol. 2006; 13:1465–1473.

57. Sun Z, Davidson R, Lin CH. Multi-detector row CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol. 2009; 69:489–495.

58. Malagutti P, Nieman K, Meijboom WB, van Mieghem CA, Pugliese F, Cademartiri F, et al. Use of 64-slice CT in symptomatic patients after coronary bypass surgery: evaluation of grafts and coronary arteries. Eur Heart J. 2007; 28:1879–1885.

59. Pache G, Saueressig U, Frydrychowicz A, Foell D, Ghanem N, Kotter E, et al. Initial experience with 64-slice cardiac CT: non-invasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27:976–980.

60. Dikkers R, Willems TP, Tio RA, Anthonio RL, Zijlstra F, Oudkerk M. The benefit of 64-MDCT prior to invasive coronary angiography in symptomatic post-CABG patients. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2007; 23:369–377.

61. Ropers D, Pohle FK, Kuettner A, Pflederer T, Anders K, Daniel WG, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography in patients after bypass surgery using 64-slice spiral computed tomography with 330-ms gantry rotation. Circulation. 2006; 114:2334–2341.

62. Meyer TS, Martinoff S, Hadamitzky M, Will A, Kastrati A, Schömig A, et al. Improved noninvasive assessment of coronary artery bypass grafts with 64-slice computed tomographic angiography in an unselected patient population. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 49:946–950.

63. Jabara R, Chronos N, Klein L, Eisenberg S, Allen R, Bradford S, et al. Comparison of multidetector 64-slice computed tomographic angiography to coronary angiography to assess the patency of coronary artery bypass grafts. Am J Cardiol. 2007; 99:1529–1534.

64. Onuma Y, Tanabe K, Chihara R, Yamamoto H, Miura Y, Kigawa I, et al. Evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts and native coronary arteries using 64-slice multidetector computed tomography. Am Heart J. 2007; 154:519–526.

65. Feuchtner GM, Schachner T, Bonatti J, Friedrich GJ, Soegner P, Klauser A, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-slice computed tomography in evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 189:574–580.

66. Datta J, White CS, Gilkeson RC, Meyer CA, Kansal S, Jani ML, et al. Anomalous coronary arteries in adults: depiction at multi-detector row CT angiography. Radiology. 2005; 235:812–818.

67. Duran C, Kantarci M, Durur Subasi I, Gulbaran M, Sevimli S, Bayram E, et al. Remarkable anatomic anomalies of coronary arteries and their clinical importance: a multidetector computed tomography angiographic study. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006; 30:939–948.

68. Kim SY, Seo JB, Do KH, Heo JN, Lee JS, Song JW, et al. Coronary artery anomalies: classification and ECG-gated multi-detector row CT findings with angiographic correlation. Radiographics. 2006; 26:317–333. discussion 333-334.

69. Schmid M, Achenbach S, Ludwig J, Baum U, Anders K, Pohle K, et al. Visualization of coronary artery anomalies by contrast-enhanced multi-detector row spiral computed tomography. Int J Cardiol. 2006; 111:430–435.

70. van der Vleuten PA, Willems TP, Götte MJ, Tio RA, Greuter MJ, Zijlstra F, et al. Quantification of global left ventricular function: comparison of multidetector computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. A meta-analysis and review of the current literature. Acta Radiol. 2006; 47:1049–1057.

71. Schlosser T, Mohrs OK, Magedanz A, Voigtländer T, Schmermund A, Barkhausen J. Assessment of left ventricular function and mass in patients undergoing computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography using 64-detector-row CT: comparison to magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Radiol. 2007; 48:30–35.

72. van der Vleuten PA, de Jonge GJ, Lubbers DD, Tio RA, Willems TP, Oudkerk M, et al. Evaluation of global left ventricular function assessment by dual-source computed tomography compared with MRI. Eur Radiol. 2009; 19:271–277.

73. Plumhans C, Mühlenbruch G, Rapaee A, Sim KH, Seyfarth T, Günther RW, et al. Assessment of global right ventricular function on 64-MDCT compared with MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 190:1358–1361.

74. Remy-Jardin M, Delhaye D, Teisseire A, Hossein-Foucher C, Duhamel A, Remy J. MDCT of right ventricular function: impact of methodologic approach in estimation of right ventricular ejection fraction, part 2. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 187:1605–1609.

75. Delhaye D, Remy-Jardin M, Teisseire A, Hossein-Foucher C, Leroy S, Duhamel A, et al. MDCT of right ventricular function: comparison of right ventricular ejection fraction estimation and equilibrium radionuclide ventriculography, part 1. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 187:1597–1604.

76. Doğan H, Kroft LJ, Huisman MV, van der Geest RJ, de Roos A. Right ventricular function in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: analysis with electrocardiography-synchronized multi-detector row CT. Radiology. 2007; 242:78–84.

77. Schwartzman D, Lacomis J, Wigginton WG. Characterization of left atrium and distal pulmonary vein morphology using multidimensional computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 41:1349–1357.

78. Cronin P, Sneider MB, Kazerooni EA, Kelly AM, Scharf C, Oral H, et al. MDCT of the left atrium and pulmonary veins in planning radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: a how-to guide. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 183:767–778.

79. Lemola K, Sneider M, Desjardins B, Case I, Han J, Good E, et al. Computed tomographic analysis of the anatomy of the left atrium and the esophagus: implications for left atrial catheter ablation. Circulation. 2004; 110:3655–3660.

80. Tops LF, Bax JJ, Zeppenfeld K, Jongbloed MR, Lamb HJ, van der Wall EE, et al. Fusion of multislice computed tomography imaging with three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping to guide radiofrequency catheter ablation procedures. Heart Rhythm. 2005; 2:1076–1081.

81. Kistler PM, Earley MJ, Harris S, Abrams D, Ellis S, Sporton SC, et al. Validation of three-dimensional cardiac image integration: use of integrated CT image into electroanatomic mapping system to perform catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2006; 17:341–348.

82. Lacomis JM, Goitein O, Deible C, Schwartzman D. CT of the pulmonary veins. J Thorac Imaging. 2007; 22:63–76.

83. Jongbloed MR, Bax JJ, Lamb HJ, Dirksen MS, Zeppenfeld K, van der Wall EE, et al. Multislice computed tomography versus intracardiac echocardiography to evaluate the pulmonary veins before radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a head-to-head comparison. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 45:343–350.

84. Marsan NA, Tops LF, Holman ER, Van de Veire NR, Zeppenfeld K, Boersma E, et al. Comparison of left atrial volumes and function by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography in patients having catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with persistence of sinus rhythm versus recurrent atrial fibrillation three months later. Am J Cardiol. 2008; 102:847–853.

85. Jongbloed MR, Lamb HJ, Bax JJ, Schuijf JD, de Roos A, van der Wall EE, et al. Noninvasive visualization of the cardiac venous system using multislice computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 45:749–753.

86. Van de Veire NR, Marsan NA, Schuijf JD, Bleeker GB, Wijffels MC, van Erven L, et al. Noninvasive imaging of cardiac venous anatomy with 64-slice multi-slice computed tomography and noninvasive assessment of left ventricular dyssynchrony by 3-dimensional tissue synchronization imaging in patients with heart failure scheduled for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Am J Cardiol. 2008; 101:1023–1029.

87. Feuchtner GM, Dichtl W, Friedrich GJ, Frick M, Alber H, Schachner T, et al. Multislice computed tomography for detection of patients with aortic valve stenosis and quantification of severity. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 47:1410–1417.

88. Feuchtner GM, Müller S, Bonatti J, Schachner T, Velik-Salchner C, Pachinger O, et al. Sixty-four slice CT evaluation of aortic stenosis using planimetry of the aortic valve area. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 189:197–203.

89. Alkadhi H, Wildermuth S, Plass A, Bettex D, Baumert B, Leschka S, et al. Aortic stenosis: comparative evaluation of 16-detector row CT and echocardiography. Radiology. 2006; 240:47–55.

90. Tanaka H, Shimada K, Yoshida K, Jissho S, Yoshikawa J, Yoshiyama M. The simultaneous assessment of aortic valve area and coronary artery stenosis using 16-slice multidetector-row computed tomography in patients with aortic stenosis comparison with echocardiography. Circ J. 2007; 71:1593–1598.

91. Habis M, Daoud B, Roger VL, Ghostine S, Caussin C, Ramadan R, et al. Comparison of 64-slice computed tomography planimetry and Doppler echocardiography in the assessment of aortic valve stenosis. J Heart Valve Dis. 2007; 16:216–224.

92. Bouvier E, Logeart D, Sablayrolles JL, Feignoux J, Scheublé C, Touche T, et al. Diagnosis of aortic valvular stenosis by multislice cardiac computed tomography. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27:3033–3038.

93. Feuchtner GM, Dichtl W, Müller S, Jodocy D, Schachner T, Klauser A, et al. 64-MDCT for diagnosis of aortic regurgitation in patients referred to CT coronary angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 191:W1–W7.

94. Jassal DS, Shapiro MD, Neilan TG, Chaithiraphan V, Ferencik M, Teague SD, et al. 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for detection of aortic regurgitation and quantification of severity. Invest Radiol. 2007; 42:507–512.

95. Alkadhi H, Desbiolles L, Husmann L, Plass A, Leschka S, Scheffel H, et al. Aortic regurgitation: assessment with 64-section CT. Radiology. 2007; 245:111–121.

96. Alkadhi H, Wildermuth S, Bettex DA, Plass A, Baumert B, Leschka S, et al. Mitral regurgitation: quantification with 16-detector row CT--initial experience. Radiology. 2006; 238:454–463.

97. Cook SC, Dyke PC 2nd, Raman SV. Management of adults with congenital heart disease with cardiovascular computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2008; 2:12–22.

98. Nicol ED, Gatzoulis M, Padley SP, Rubens M. Assessment of adult congenital heart disease with multi-detector computed tomography: beyond coronary lumenography. Clin Radiol. 2007; 62:518–527.

99. Haller S, Kaiser C, Buser P, Bongartz G, Bremerich J. Coronary artery imaging with contrast-enhanced MDCT: extracardiac findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 187:105–110.

100. Kim TJ, Han DH, Jin KN, Won Lee K. Lung cancer detected at cardiac CT: prevalence, clinicoradiologic features, and importance of full-field-of-view images. Radiology. 2010; 255:369–376.

101. Kim JW, Kang EY, Yong HS, Kim YK, Woo OH, Oh YW, et al. Incidental extracardiac findings at cardiac CT angiography: comparison of prevalence and clinical significance between precontrast low-dose whole thoracic scan and postcontrast retrospective ECG-gated cardiac scan. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009; 25:Suppl 1. 75–81.

102. ASCI CCT & CMR Guideline Working Group. Tsai IC, Choi BW, Chan C, Jinzaki M, Kitagawa K, Yong HS, et al. ASCI 2010 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography: a report of the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Cardiac Computed Tomography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guideline Working Group. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010; 26:Suppl 1. 1–15.

103. Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM, Poon M, Hendel RC, Carr JC, 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; 48:1475–1497.

104. Poon M, Rubin GD, Achenbach S, Attebery TW, Berman DS, Brady TJ, et al. Consensus update on the appropriate usage of cardiac computed tomographic angiography. J Invasive Cardiol. 2007; 19:484–490.

105. Schroeder S, Achenbach S, Bengel F, Burgstahler C, Cademartiri F, de Feyter P, et al. Cardiac computed tomography: indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements: report of a Writing Group deployed by the Working Group Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2008; 29:531–556.

106. Dennie CJ, Leipsic J, Brydie A. Canadian Association of Radiologists. Canadian Association of Radiologists: Consensus Guidelines and Standards for Cardiac CT. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2009; 60:19–34.

107. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, Mark D, Min J, O'Gara P, et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010; 56:1864–1894.