| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Hypertension. 2007;49:249.)
© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.
Brief Reviews |
From the Division of Nephrology and Hypertension (E.D., L.O.L.) and Cardiovascular Disease (L.O.L.), Department of Medicine, and the Department of Physiology and Biomedical Engineering (E.D., E.L.R.), Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minn.
Correspondence to Lilach O. Lerman, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905. E-mail lerman.lilach@mayo.edu
An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract. |
| Introduction |
|---|
Several noninvasive or minimally invasive techniques currently used to explore cardiac function, such as echocardiography, scintigraphy, and single-photon emission computed tomography, show diagnostic reliability but low spatial resolution and poor anatomic details. Therefore, higher-resolution techniques, like positron emission tomography, MRI, and computed tomography (CT), have been steadily gaining popularity.1 MRI can assess cardiac function, mass, volume, and myocardial viability, with limited application in patients with metal fragments, and positron emission tomography provides reliable estimates of myocardial perfusion and metabolism, albeit at low spatial resolution. Furthermore, since its inception in the 1970s, CT quickly incorporated into clinical practice, and recent technical advances have placed it in the forefront for comprehensive evaluation of cardiac function at several levels, from the function of the heart as a pump, to the behavior of the microvessels that feed its walls (Figure 1). For example, CT overcomes some of the limitations of MRI,
|
Hypertension Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2007 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |