Article Figures & Data
Figures
- FIGURE 1.
Corrected and uncorrected artifacts using CT AC and prone imaging.
- FIGURE 2.
Matching between correction technique and final diagnosis.
- FIGURE 3.
(A) No-AC images showing mild reversible inferior wall hypoperfusion defect. (B) Stress/rest CT AC images showing normalization of inferior wall hypoperfusion defect. (C) Stress/rest prone images showing normalization of inferior wall hypoperfusion defect.
- FIGURE 4.
(A) No-AC images showing moderate reversible hypoperfusion defect in anteroseptal wall. (B) Stress/rest CT AC images showing partial improvement of anteroseptal wall defect. (C) Stress/rest prone images showing complete resolution of anteroseptal wall defect (C).
- FIGURE 5.
(A) No-AC images showing hypoperfusion defect in inferior wall. (B) Stress/rest CT AC images showing partial improvement of inferior wall defect. (C) Stress/rest prone images showing complete resolution of inferior wall defect.
Tables
Parameter n Non-AC CT AC Prone imaging Negative for myocardial ischemia 4 No perfusion defect No perfusion defect No perfusion defect Multivessel disease 10 Perfusion defect Perfusion defect Perfusion defect Sex n Percentage Age (mean ± SD) Male 20 67% 54.7 ± 12.5 Female 10 33% 49.8 ± 11 Total 30 100% 53 ± 12 Correction technique Final diagnosis Total Matched Mismatched CT AC 50 (94%) 3 (6%) 53 (100%) Prone imaging 48 (91%) 5 (9%) 53 (100%) Parameter Wall defects in CT AC Wall defects in prone imaging True defects Total Corrected 28 (90.32%) 26 (83.8%) None 26 (49.1%) Uncorrected 3 (9.68%) 5 (16.2%) 22 (100%) 27 (50.9%) Total 31 (100%) 22 (100%) 53 (100%) Parameter Specificity Sensitivity CT AC 90.3% 100% Prone imaging 83.8% 100%
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.