[Clinical applications of computed tomography coronary angiography]

[Multidetector computed tomography assessment of cardiac comorbidity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease]

Cardiac comorbidity is one of the most important prognostic factors in lung disease, especially in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The imaging techniques available for the study of this systemic manifestation concomitant with COPD include heart catheterization, transthoracic echocardiography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) represents a significant advance in this field because it enables the acquisition of simultaneous studies of the cardiopulmonary anatomy that go beyond anatomic and morphologic analysis to include a functional approach to this condition. In this article, we review the practical aspects necessary to evaluate cardiac comorbidity in patients with COPD, both from the point of view of pulmonary hypertension and of the analysis of ventricular dysfunction and coronary heart disease.

Accuracy of different reconstruction intervals to quantify left ventricular function and mass in cardiac computed tomography examinations

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of cardiac dual-source CT (DSCT) reconstructions obtained at 5% and 10% of the cardiac cycle and MRI for quantifying global left ventricular (LV) function and mass in heart transplant recipients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We prospectively included 23 heart transplant recipients (21 male, mean age 60±11.7 years) who underwent cardiac DSCT and MRI examinations. We compared LV parameters on cardiac DSCT reconstructions obtained at 5% (0%-95%) and 10% (0%-90%) intervals of the cardiac cycle and on double-oblique short-axis MR images. We determined ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), stroke volume (SV), and myocardial mass using commercially available semiautomated segmentation analysis software for DSCT datasets and conventional manual contour tracing for MR studies.

RESULTS

Using different reconstruction intervals to quantify LV parameters at DSCT resulted in non-significant differences (P>.05). Compared to MRI, DSCT slightly overestimated LV-EDV, ESV, and mass when both 5% (11.5±25.1ml, 6.8±10.9ml, and 28.3±21.6g, respectively) and 10% (mean difference 15.3±26.3ml, 7.4±11.5ml, and 29.3±18.7g, respectively) reconstruction intervals were used. DSCT and MRI estimates of EF and SV were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

In heart transplant recipients, DSCT allows reliable quantification of LV function and mass compared with MRI, even using 10% interval reconstructions.