OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the potential value of magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion in the follow-up of patients after coronary intervention. BACKGROUND: In some patients a residual impairment of myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) early after successful coronary intervention has been observed. In this study we evaluated an MPR index before and after intervention with magnetic resonance. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with single- and multivessel coronary artery disease were studied before and 24 h after intervention. The signal intensity time curves of the first pass of a gadolinium-diethylene triamine pentacetic acid bolus injected via a central vein catheter were evaluated before and after dipyridamole infusion. The upslope was determined using a linear fit. Myocardial perfusion reserve index was estimated from the alterations of the upslope. RESULTS: The MPR index in segments perfused by the stenotic artery was significantly lower than in the control segments (1.07 +/- 0.24 vs. 2.18 +/- 0.35, p < 0.001) and improved significantly after intervention (1.89 +/- 0.39, p < 0.001) but did not normalize completely (p < 0.01). After intervention the MPR index remained significantly lower in the balloon percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty group (1.72 +/- 0.38; n = 13) in comparison with the stent group (1.99 +/- 0.36, n = 18, p < 0.05). In the stent group a complete normalization of the MPR index was found 24 h after stenting. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance perfusion measurements allow a reliable assessment of MPR index. An improvement of MPR index can be observed after coronary intervention, which is more pronounced after stenting. Magnetic resonance perfusion measurements allow the assessment and may be useful for the follow-up of patients with coronary artery disease after coronary intervention.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the potential value of magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion in the follow-up of patients after coronary intervention. BACKGROUND: In some patients a residual impairment of myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) early after successful coronary intervention has been observed. In this study we evaluated an MPR index before and after intervention with magnetic resonance. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with single- and multivessel coronary artery disease were studied before and 24 h after intervention. The signal intensity time curves of the first pass of a gadolinium-diethylene triamine pentacetic acid bolus injected via a central vein catheter were evaluated before and after dipyridamole infusion. The upslope was determined using a linear fit. Myocardial perfusion reserve index was estimated from the alterations of the upslope. RESULTS: The MPR index in segments perfused by the stenotic artery was significantly lower than in the control segments (1.07 +/- 0.24 vs. 2.18 +/- 0.35, p < 0.001) and improved significantly after intervention (1.89 +/- 0.39, p < 0.001) but did not normalize completely (p < 0.01). After intervention the MPR index remained significantly lower in the balloon percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty group (1.72 +/- 0.38; n = 13) in comparison with the stent group (1.99 +/- 0.36, n = 18, p < 0.05). In the stent group a complete normalization of the MPR index was found 24 h after stenting. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance perfusion measurements allow a reliable assessment of MPR index. An improvement of MPR index can be observed after coronary intervention, which is more pronounced after stenting. Magnetic resonance perfusion measurements allow the assessment and may be useful for the follow-up of patients with coronary artery disease after coronary intervention.
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: Holger Thiele; Sven Plein; Marcel Breeuwer; John P Ridgway; David Higgins; Penelope J Thorley; Gerhard Schuler; Mohan U Sivananthan Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: J D Schuijf; L J Shaw; W Wijns; H J Lamb; D Poldermans; A de Roos; E E van der Wall; J J Bax Journal: Heart Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Federico E Mordini; Tariq Haddad; Li-Yueh Hsu; Peter Kellman; Tracy B Lowrey; Anthony H Aletras; W Patricia Bandettini; Andrew E Arai Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-01