References
- 1. WHO. The global burden of disease: 2004 update. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008b. https://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/2004_report_update/en/
- 2. Saeed M, Van TA, Krug R, Hetts SW, Wilson MW. Cardiac MR imaging: current status and future direction. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2015;5:290-310.
- 3. Stănescu A, Opincariu D, Rat N, et al. Hybrid Imaging in the Assessment of Myocardial Ischemia and Viability. Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine. 2016;3:242-246.10.1515/jim-2016-0071
- 4. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Appelman YE, et al. Hybrid imaging using quantitative H2 15O PET and CT-based coronary angiography for the detection of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:55-63.10.2967/jnumed.112.104687
- 5. Partington SL, Kwong RY Dorbala S. Multimodality imaging in the assessment of myocardial viability. S Heart Fail Rev. 2011;16:381-395.10.1007/s10741-010-9201-7
- 6. Kajander S, Joutsiniemi E, Saraste M, et al. Cardiac positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging accurately detects anatomically and functionally significant coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2010;122:603-613.10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.915009
- 7. Rispler S, Keidar Z, Ghersin E, et al. Integrated single-photon emission computed tomography and computed tomography coronary angiography for the assessment of hemodynamically significant coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:1059-1067.10.1016/j.jacc.2006.10.069
- 8. Mowatt G, Cummins E, Waugh N, et al. Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 64-slice or higher computed tomography angiography as an alternative to invasive coronary angiography in the investigation of coronary artery disease. Health Technol Assess. 2008;12:iii-iv, ix-143.
- 9. Masuda A, Yamaki T, Kunii H, et al. Simultaneous Assessment of Myocardial Viability With 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose Uptake and Late Gadolinium Enhancement by PET/MRI. Circulation. 2016;134:A11929.
- 10. Leone AM, De Caterina AR, Basile E, et al. Influence of the amount of myocardium subtended by a stenosis on fractional flow reserve. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:29-36.10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.971101
- 11. Selvanayagam JB, Kardos A, Francis JM, et al. Value of delayed-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in predicting myocardial viability after surgical revascularization. Circulation. 2004;110:1535-1541.10.1161/01.CIR.0000142045.22628.74
- 12. Allman KC, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Udelson JE. Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:1151-1158.10.1016/S0735-1097(02)01726-6
- 13. Thiele H, Kappl MJ, Conradi S, Niebauer J, Hambrecht, Schuler G. Reproducibility of chronic and acute infarct size measurement by delayed enhancement-magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:1641-1645.10.1016/j.jacc.2005.11.06516631003
- 14. Ide S, Sumitsuji S, Yamaguchi O, Sakata Y. Cardiac computed tomography-derived myocardial mass at risk using the Voronoi-based segmentation algorithm: a histological validation study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2017;11:179-182.10.1016/j.jcct.2017.04.00728431861
- 15. Califf RM, Phillips HR, Hindman MC, et al. Prognostic value of a coronary artery jeopardy score. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985;5:1055-1063.10.1016/S0735-1097(85)80005-X
- 16. Dash H, Johnson RA, Dinsmore RE, Hawthorne JW. Cardiomyopathic syndrome due to coronary artery disease. I. Relation to angiographic extent of coronary artery disease and to remote myocardial infarction. Br Heart J. 1977;39:733-739.10.1136/hrt.39.7.733
- 17. Mahrholdt H, Wagner A, Judd R.M, Sechtem U, Kim RJ. Delayed enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of nonischaemic cardiomyopathies. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:1461-1474.10.1093/eurheartj/ehi258
- 18. Wijns W, Vatner SF, Camici PG. Hibernating myocardium. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:173-181.10.1056/NEJM199807163390307
- 19. Tillisch J, Brunken R, Marshall R, et al. Reversibility of cardial wall-motion abnormalities predicted by positron tomography. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:884-888.10.1056/NEJM198604033141405
- 20. Maddahi J, Schelbert H, Brunken R, Di Carli M. Role of thallium-201 and PET imaging in evaluation of myocardial viability and management of patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:707-715.
- 21. Christopher J. PET vs. MRI for Myocardial Viability. Indian Journal of Clinical Cardiology. 2020;1:40-45.10.1177/2632463620901369
- 22. Kim SY, Kim KS, Seung MJ, et al. The culprit lesion score on multi-detector computed tomography can detect vulnerable coronary artery plaque. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;26:245-252.10.1007/s10554-010-9712-2
- 23. Force T, Kemper A, Perkins L, et al. Overestimation of infarct size by quantitative two-dimensional echocardiography: the role of tethering and of analytic procedures. Circulation. 1986;73:1360-1368.10.1161/01.CIR.73.6.1360
- 24. Muller J, Tofler G, Stone P. Circadian variation and triggers of onset of acute cardiovascular disease. Circulation. 1989;79:733-743.10.1161/01.CIR.79.4.733
- 25. Muller JE, Abela GS, Nesto RW, et al. Triggers, acute risk factors and vulnerable plaques: the lexicon of a new frontier. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994;23:809-813.10.1016/0735-1097(94)90772-2
- 26. Naghavi M, Libby P, Falk E, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient: a call for new definitions and risk assessment strategies: Part I. Circulation. 2003;108:1664-1672.10.1161/01.CIR.0000087480.94275.9714530185
- 27. Obaid DR, Calvert PA, Gopalan D, et al. Atherosclerotic plaque composition and classification identified by coronary computed tomography: assessment of computed tomography-generated plaque maps compared with virtual histology intravascular ultrasound and histology. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6:655-664.10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.112.00025023960215
- 28. Pundziute G, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, et al. Head-to-head comparison of coronary plaque evaluation between multislice computed tomography and intravascular ultrasound radiofrequency data analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2008;1:176-182.10.1016/j.jcin.2008.01.00719463297
- 29. Motoyama S, Kondo T, Sarai M, et al. Multislice computed tomographic characteristics of coronary lesions in acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:319-326.10.1016/j.jacc.2007.03.04417659199
- 30. Marwan M, Taher MA, El Meniawy K, et al. In vivo CT detection of lipid-rich coronary artery atherosclerotic plaques using quantitative histogram analysis: a head to head comparison with IVUS. Atherosclerosis. 2011;215:110-115.10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2010.12.00621227419
- 31. Maurovich-Horvat P, Hoffmann U, Vorpahl M, et al. The napkin-ring sign: CT signature of high-risk coronary plaques? JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:440-444.
- 32. Maurovich-Horvat P, Ferencik M, Voros S, et al. Comprehensive plaque assessment by coronary CT angiography. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2014;11:390-402.10.1038/nrcardio.2014.6024755916
- 33. Feuchtner G, Kerber J, Burghard P, et al. The high-risk criteria low-attenuation plaque <60 HU and the napkin-ring sign are the most powerful predictors of MACE: a long-term follow-up study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;18:772-779.10.1093/ehjci/jew16727502292
- 34. Hoffmann U, Moselewski F, Nieman K, 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;47:1655-1662.10.1016/j.jacc.2006.01.04116631006