4.6 Article

Quantitative Assessment of Coronary Microvascular Function Dynamic Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography, Positron Emission Tomography, Ultrasound, Computed Tomography, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Journal

CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING
Volume 10, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.117.006427

Keywords

coronary flow reserve; coronary microvascular function; microvascular dysfunction; myocardial blood flow; myocardial perfusion imaging

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) T32 training grant [HL098069]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A healthy, functional microcirculation in combination with nonobstructed epicardial coronary arteries is the prerequisite of normal myocardial perfusion. Quantitative assessment in myocardial perfusion and determination of absolute myocardial blood flow can be achieved noninvasively using dynamic imaging with multiple imaging modalities. Extensive evidence supports the clinical value of noninvasively assessing indices of coronary flow for diagnosing coronary microvascular dysfunction; in certain diseases, the degree of coronary microvascular impairment carries important prognostic relevance. Although, currently positron emission tomography is the most commonly used tool for the quantification of myocardial blood flow, other modalities, including single-photon emission computed tomography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and myocardial contrast echocardiography, have emerged as techniques with great promise for determination of coronary microvascular dysfunction. The following review will describe basic concepts of coronary and microvascular physiology, review available modalities for dynamic imaging for quantitative assessment of coronary perfusion and myocardial blood flow, and discuss their application in distinct forms of coronary microvascular dysfunction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available