4.6 Review

Coronary Computer Tomography Angiography in 2021-Acquisition Protocols, Tips and Tricks and Heading beyond the Possible

期刊

DIAGNOSTICS
卷 11, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11061072

关键词

CCTA; prognosis; chronic coronary syndromes; review; plaque analysis; diagnosis coronary artery disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent technological advances have made coronary computer tomography angiography (CCTA) a central method for diagnosing coronary artery disease, proving its reliability in detecting relevant coronary artery stenosis and measuring hemodynamic relevance. It also stands out for its ability to identify different stages of the atherosclerotic process.
Recent technological advances, together with an increasing body of evidence from randomized trials, have placed coronary computer tomography angiography (CCTA) in the center of the diagnostic workup of patients with coronary artery disease. The method was proven reliable in the diagnosis of relevant coronary artery stenosis. Furthermore, it can identify different stages of the atherosclerotic process, including early atherosclerotic changes of the coronary vessel wall, a quality not met by other non-invasive tests. In addition, newer computational software can measure the hemodynamic relevance (fractional flow reserve) of a certain stenosis. In addition, if required, information related to cardiac and valvular function can be provided with specific protocols. Importantly, recent trials have highlighted the prognostic relevance of CCTA in patients with coronary artery disease, which helped establishing CCTA as the first-line method for the diagnostic work-up of such patients in current guidelines. All this can be gathered in one relatively fast examination with minimal discomfort for the patient and, with newer machines, with very low radiation exposure. Herein, we provide an overview of the current technical aspects, indications, pitfalls, and new horizons with CCTA, providing examples from our own clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据