Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017 Oct 19;19(1):78. doi: 10.1186/s12968-017-0388-9.

Fully quantitative cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion ready for clinical use: a comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography.

Author information

1
Department of Clinical Physiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund University and Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
2
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, DHHS, 10 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
3
Department of Radiation Physics, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
4
Laboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical - Imaging Technologies, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
5
Department of Clinical Physiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund University and Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden. hakan.arheden@med.lu.se.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Recent studies have shown that quantification of myocardial perfusion (MP) at stress and myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) offer additional diagnostic and prognostic information compared to qualitative and semi-quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion distribution in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Technical advancements have enabled fully automatic quantification of MP using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) to be performed in-line in a clinical workflow. The aim of this study was to validate the use of the automated CMR perfusion mapping technique for quantification of MP using 13N-NH3 cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) as the reference method.

METHODS:

Twenty-one patients with stable CAD were included in the study. All patients underwent adenosine stress and rest perfusion imaging with 13N-NH3 PET and a dual sequence, single contrast bolus CMR on the same day. Global and regional MP were quantified both at stress and rest using PET and CMR.

RESULTS:

There was good agreement between global MP quantified by PET and CMR both at stress (-0.1 ± 0.5 ml/min/g) and at rest (0 ± 0.2 ml/min/g) with a strong correlation (r = 0.92, p < 0.001; y = 0.94× + 0.14). Furthermore, there was strong correlation between CMR and PET with regards to regional MP (r = 0.83, p < 0.001; y = 0.87× + 0.26) with a good agreement (-0.1 ± 0.6 ml/min/g). There was also a significant correlation between CMR and PET with regard to global and regional MPR (r = 0.69, p = 0.001 and r = 0.57, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

There is good agreement between MP quantified by 13N-NH3 PET and dual sequence, single contrast bolus CMR in patients with stable CAD. Thus, CMR is viable in clinical practice for quantification of MP.

KEYWORDS:

Cardiac magnetic resonance; Myocardial perfusion; Myocardial perfusion reserve; Positron emission tomography

PMID:
29047385
PMCID:
PMC5648469
DOI:
10.1186/s12968-017-0388-9
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center