Why the study?
What are the advantages and limitations of direct and indirect imaging techniques other than coronary arteriography for evaluating coronary bypass graft patency?
What are the advantages and limitations of direct and indirect imaging techniques other than coronary arteriography for evaluating coronary bypass graft patency?
This review outlines the utility of various non-invasive and alternative imaging modalities for assessing coronary bypass graft patency.
May inform non-invasive graft surveillance choices; leaves open need for prospective validation studies.
Patients having one or more coronary artery bypass graft operations constitute an important part of the practice of cardiac radiology. Bypass graft patency can be determined by indirect and direct methods. The indirect imaging methods include radionuclide ventriculography, thallium-201 scintigraphy, and positron emission tomography. The direct methods include conventional CT, ultrafast CT, MR imaging, digital subtraction angiography, and Doppler sonography. This review discusses the advantages and limitations of these methods and attempts to define the relative importance of each of these techniques in the evaluation of bypass graft patency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stanford et al. (1991) studied this question.