Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Curr Pharm Des. 2015;21(36):5267–5276. doi: 10.2174/1381612821666150915104529

Table 1. Comparison of imaging modalities for atherosclerosis [55, 56].

Modality Advantages Disadvantages
SPECT High sensitivity (10-14 – fmol)
Signal quantification		 Low spatial resolution (1-2mm)
Radiation exposure
PET High sensitivity (10-15 – fmol)
Signal quantification
Use of short half-life radionuclides		 Low spatial resolution (1-2mm)
Radiation exposure
CT High spatial resolution (50-200μm) Low sensitivity (10-6 - μmol)
Radiation exposure
MRI High spatial resolution (10-100μm) Low sensitivity (10-9 – nmol)
Use of contrast agents
IVUS Differentiation between layers in the arterial wall
High axial resolution (∼100μm)
Details about plaque composition		 Invasive method by catheter
OCT Higher resolution than IVUS (∼10μm) Invasive method by catheter
Requires saline flushing of the lumen
Limited depth of view
FMT Versatility of use Limited depth of view for infrared probes