BACKGROUND: There is a high incidence of anomalous coronary arteries in subjects with congenital heart disease. These abnormalities can be responsible for myocardial ischemia and sudden death or be damaged during surgical intervention. It can be difficult to define the proximal course of anomalous coronary arteries with the use of conventional x-ray coronary angiography. Magnetic resonance coronary angiography (MRCA) has been shown to be useful in the assessment of the 3-dimensional relationship between the coronary arteries and the great vessels in subjects with normal cardiac morphology but has not been used in patients with congenital heart disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five adults with various congenital heart abnormalities were studied. X-ray coronary angiography and respiratory-gated MRCA were performed in all subjects. Coronary artery origin and proximal course were assessed for each imaging modality by separate, blinded investigators. Images were then compared, and a consensus diagnosis was reached. With the consensus readings for both magnetic resonance and x-ray coronary angiography, it was possible to identify the origin and course of the proximal coronary arteries in all 25 subjects: 16 with coronary anomalies and 9 with normal coronary arteries. Respiratory-gated MRCA had an accuracy of 92%, a sensitivity of 88%, and a specificity of 100% for the detection of abnormal coronary arteries. The MRCA results were more likely to agree with the consensus for definition of the proximal course of the coronary arteries (P<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: For the assessment of anomalous coronary artery anatomy in patients with congenital heart disease, the use of the combination of MRCA with x-ray coronary angiography improves the definition of the proximal coronary artery course. MRCA provides correct spatial relationships, whereas x-ray angiography provides a view of the entire coronary length and its peripheral run-off. Furthermore, respiratory-gated MRCA can be performed without breath holding and with only limited subject cooperation.
BACKGROUND: There is a high incidence of anomalous coronary arteries in subjects with congenital heart disease. These abnormalities can be responsible for myocardial ischemia and sudden death or be damaged during surgical intervention. It can be difficult to define the proximal course of anomalous coronary arteries with the use of conventional x-ray coronary angiography. Magnetic resonance coronary angiography (MRCA) has been shown to be useful in the assessment of the 3-dimensional relationship between the coronary arteries and the great vessels in subjects with normal cardiac morphology but has not been used in patients with congenital heart disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five adults with various congenital heart abnormalities were studied. X-ray coronary angiography and respiratory-gated MRCA were performed in all subjects. Coronary artery origin and proximal course were assessed for each imaging modality by separate, blinded investigators. Images were then compared, and a consensus diagnosis was reached. With the consensus readings for both magnetic resonance and x-ray coronary angiography, it was possible to identify the origin and course of the proximal coronary arteries in all 25 subjects: 16 with coronary anomalies and 9 with normal coronary arteries. Respiratory-gated MRCA had an accuracy of 92%, a sensitivity of 88%, and a specificity of 100% for the detection of abnormal coronary arteries. The MRCA results were more likely to agree with the consensus for definition of the proximal course of the coronary arteries (P<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: For the assessment of anomalous coronary artery anatomy in patients with congenital heart disease, the use of the combination of MRCA with x-ray coronary angiography improves the definition of the proximal coronary artery course. MRCA provides correct spatial relationships, whereas x-ray angiography provides a view of the entire coronary length and its peripheral run-off. Furthermore, respiratory-gated MRCA can be performed without breath holding and with only limited subject cooperation.
Authors: W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-05-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Richard M McCarthy; Vibhas S Deshpande; Nirat Beohar; Sheridan N Meyers; Steven M Shea; Jordin D Green; Xin Liu; Xiaoming Bi; F Scott Pereles; John Paul Finn; Charles J Davidson; James C Carr; Debiao Li Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 6.016