As coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has emerged as a non-invasive alternative for evaluation of coronary anatomy with a lower referral threshold than invasive coronary angiography (ICA), the prevalence of coronary anomalies in CCTA may more closely reflect the true prevalence in the general population. Morphological features of coronary anomalies can be evaluated more precisely by CCTA than by ICA, which might lead to a higher identification of congenital coronary anomalies in CCTA compared to ICA. To evaluate the incidence, clinical and morphological features of the anatomy of patients with coronary anomalies detected either by coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) with prospective ECG-triggering or invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Consecutive patients underwent 64-slice CCTA (n = 1′759) with prospective ECG-triggering or ICA (n = 9′782) and coronary anatomy was evaluated for identification of coronary anomalies to predefined criteria (origin, course and termination) according to international recommendations. The prevalence of coronary anomalies was 7.9% (n = 138) in CCTA and 2.1% in ICA (n = 203; p < 0.01). The most commonly coronary anomaly detected by CCTA was myocardial bridging 42.8% (n = 59) vs. 21.2% (n = 43); p < 0.01, while with ICA an absent left main trunk was the most observed anomaly 36.0% (n = 73; p < 0.01). In 9.4% (n = 13) of identified coronary anomalies in CCTA 9.4% were potentially serious coronary anaomalies, defined as a course of the coronary artery between aorta and pulmonary artery were identified. The prevalence of coronary anomalies is substantially higher with CCTA than ICA even after exclusion of patients with myocardial bridging which is more frequently found with CCTA. This suggests that the true prevalence of coronary anomalies in the general population may have been underestimated based on ICA.

Cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) are encouraging precise non-invasive imaging modalities that allow imaging of the cellular function of the heart, while other non-invasive cardiovascular imaging modalities are considered to be techniques for imaging the anatomy, morphology, structure, function and tissue characteristics. The role of cardiac PET has been growing rapidly and providing high diagnostic accuracy of coronary artery disease (CAD). Clinical cardiology has established PET as a criterion for the assessment of myocardial viability and is recommended for the proper management of reduced left ventricle (LV) function and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Hybrid PET/CT imaging has enabled simultaneous integration of the coronary anatomy with myocardial perfusion and metabolism and has improved characterization of dysfunctional areas in chronic CAD. Also, the availability of quantitative myocardial blood flow (MBF) evaluation with various PET perfusion tracers provides additional prognostic information and enhances the diagnostic performance of nuclear imaging.

Background and Objectives: To compare the accuracy of multimodality imaging (myocardial perfusion imaging with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT MPI), 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET), and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in the evaluation of left ventricle (LV) myocardial viability for the patients with the myocardial infarction (MI) and symptomatic heart failure (HF). Materials and Methods: 31 consecutive patients were included in the study prospectively, with a history of previous myocardial infarction, symptomatic HF (NYHA) functional class II or above, reduced ejection fraction (EF) ≤ 40%. All patients had confirmed atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD), but conflicting opinions regarding the need for percutaneous intervention due to the suspected myocardial scar tissue. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), SPECT MPI, 18F-FDG PET, and CMR with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) examinations. Quantification of myocardial viability was assessed in a 17-segment model. All segments that were described as non-viable (score 4) by CMR LGE and PET were compared. The difference of score between CMR and PET we named reversibility score. According to this reversibility score, patients were divided into two groups: Group 1, reversibility score > 10 (viable myocardium with a chance of functional recovery after revascularization); Group 2, reversibility score ≤ 10 (less viable myocardium when revascularisation remains questionable). Results: 527 segments were compared in total. A significant difference in scores 1, 2, 3 group, and score 4 group was revealed between different modalities. CMR identified “non-viable” myocardium in 28.1% of segments across all groups, significantly different than SPECT in 11.8% PET in 6.5% Group 1 (viable myocardium group) patients had significantly higher physical tolerance (6 MWT (m) 3892 ± 94.5 vs. 301.4 ± 48.2), less dilated LV (LVEDD (mm) (TTE) 53.2 ± 7.9 vs. 63.4 ± 8.9; MM (g) (TTE) 239.5 ± 85.9 vs. 276.3 ± 62.7; LVEDD (mm) (CMR) 61.7 ± 8.1 vs. 69.0 ± 6.1; LVEDDi (mm/m²) (CMR) 29.8 ± 3.7 vs. 35.2 ± 3.1), significantly better parameters of the right heart (RV diameter (mm) (TTE) 33.4 ± 6.9 vs. 38.5 ± 5.0; TAPSE (mm) (TTE) 18.7 ± 2.0 vs. 15.2 ± 2.0), better LV SENC function (LV GLS (CMR) −14.3 ± 2.1 vs. 11.4 ± 2.9; LV GCS (CMR) −17.2 ± 4.6 vs. 12.7 ± 2.6), smaller size of involved myocardium (infarct size (%) (CMR) 24.5 ± 9.6 vs. 34.8 ± 11.1). Good correlations were found with several variables (LVEDD (CMR), LV EF (CMR), LV GCS (CMR)) with a coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.72. According to the cut-off values (LVEDV (CMR) > 330 mL, infarct size (CMR) > 26%, and LV GCS (CMR) < −15.8), we performed prediction of non-viable myocardium (reversibility score < 10) with the overall percentage of 80.6 (Nagelkerke R² 0.57). Conclusions: LGE CMR reveals a significantly higher number of scars, and the FDG PET appears to be more optimistic in the functional recovery prediction. Moreover, using exact imaging parameters (LVEDV (CMR) > 330 mL, infarct size (CMR) > 26% and LV GCS (CMR) < −15.8) may increase sensitivity and specificity of LGE CMR for evaluation of non-viable myocardium and lead to a better clinical solution (revascularization vs. medical treatment) even when viability is low in LGE CMR, and FDG PET is not performed.

Objectives: To find the imaging mortality predictors in patients with previous myocardial infarction (MI), symptomatic heart failure (HF), and reduced left ventricle (LV) ejection fraction (EF). Methods: for the study 39 patients were selected prospectively with prior MI, symptomatic HF, and LVEF ≤40%. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT MPI), 18F-FDG positron emission tomography (FDG PET). 31 patients underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). Patients were divided into two groups: 1 group – cardiac death; 2 group – no cardiac death. Myocardial scars were assessed on a 5-point-scale. Follow-up data was obtained. Results: Imaging features disclosed significant difference ( p < 0.05) of defect score (CMR and SPECT-PET), LV end-diastolic diameter (EDD) (TTE), LVEDD index (CMR), LV global longitudinal strain (CMR) and LV global circumferential strain (CMR) between the groups. Predictors of cardiac death were: LVEDD index (TTE) and LV global longitudinal strain. The cut-off values to predict cardiac death were: defect score (CMR) 25 (AUC, 79.5%; OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2–2.7), SPECT-PET defect score 22 (AUC, 73.9%; OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3–0.7), LVEDD (TTE) 58 mm (AUC, 88.4%; OR 23.6, 95% CI 2.6–217.7), LVEDDi 30 mm/m² (TTE) (AUC, 73.6%; OR 22.0, 95% CI 1.9–251.5), LVEDDi 33.6 mm/m² (CMR) (AUC, 73.6%; OR 22.0, 95% CI 1.9–251.5), LV global longitudinal strain −13.4 (AUC, 87.8%; OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2–3.7) and LV global circumferential strain −16.3 (AUC, 76.1%; OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2–3.0). Conclusions: Imaging features, such as defect score (CMR) >25, SPECT-PET defect score >22, LVEDD (TTE) >58 mm, LVEDDi (TTE) >30 mm/m², LVEDDi (CMR) >33.6 mm/m², LV global longitudinal strain −13.4 and LV global circumferential strain −16.3, may increase sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET and LGE CMR predicting of late mortality.