BACKGROUND: Myocardial infarcts are routinely detected by nuclear imaging techniques such as single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging. A newly developed technique for infarct detection based on contrast-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has higher spatial resolution than SPECT. We postulated that this technique would detect infarcts missed by SPECT. METHODS: We did contrast-enhanced CMR and SPECT examinations in 91 patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease. All CMR and SPECT images were scored, using a 14-segment model, for the presence, location, and spatial extent of infarction. To compare each imaging modality to a gold standard, we also acquired contrast-enhanced CMR and SPECT images in 12 dogs with, and three dogs without, myocardial infarction as defined by histochemical staining. FINDINGS: In animals, contrast-enhanced CMR and SPECT detected all segments with nearly transmural infarction (>75% transmural extent of the left-ventricular wall). CMR also identified 100 of the 109 segments (92%) with subendocardial infarction (<50% transmural extent of the left-ventricular wall), whereas SPECT identified only 31 (28%). SPECT and CMR showed high specificity for the detection of infarction (97% and 98%, respectively). In patients, all segments with nearly transmural infarction, as defined by contrast-enhanced CMR, were detected by SPECT. However, of the 181 segments with subendocardial infarction, 85 (47%) were not detected by SPECT. On a per patient basis, six (13%) individuals with subendocardial infarcts visible by CMR had no evidence of infarction by SPECT. INTERPRETATION: SPECT and CMR detect transmural myocardial infarcts at similar rates. However, CMR systematically detects subendocardial infarcts that are missed by SPECT.
BACKGROUND:Myocardial infarcts are routinely detected by nuclear imaging techniques such as single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging. A newly developed technique for infarct detection based on contrast-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has higher spatial resolution than SPECT. We postulated that this technique would detect infarcts missed by SPECT. METHODS: We did contrast-enhanced CMR and SPECT examinations in 91 patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease. All CMR and SPECT images were scored, using a 14-segment model, for the presence, location, and spatial extent of infarction. To compare each imaging modality to a gold standard, we also acquired contrast-enhanced CMR and SPECT images in 12 dogs with, and three dogs without, myocardial infarction as defined by histochemical staining. FINDINGS: In animals, contrast-enhanced CMR and SPECT detected all segments with nearly transmural infarction (>75% transmural extent of the left-ventricular wall). CMR also identified 100 of the 109 segments (92%) with subendocardial infarction (<50% transmural extent of the left-ventricular wall), whereas SPECT identified only 31 (28%). SPECT and CMR showed high specificity for the detection of infarction (97% and 98%, respectively). In patients, all segments with nearly transmural infarction, as defined by contrast-enhanced CMR, were detected by SPECT. However, of the 181 segments with subendocardial infarction, 85 (47%) were not detected by SPECT. On a per patient basis, six (13%) individuals with subendocardial infarcts visible by CMR had no evidence of infarction by SPECT. INTERPRETATION: SPECT and CMR detect transmural myocardial infarcts at similar rates. However, CMR systematically detects subendocardial infarcts that are missed by SPECT.
Authors: H B Hillenbrand; J Sandstede; C Lipke; H Köstler; T Pabst; E Werner; G Ertl; D Hahn; W R Bauer Journal: MAGMA Date: 2003-09-30 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Erica Dall'Armellina; Theodoros D Karamitsos; Stefan Neubauer; Robin P Choudhury Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2010-09-21 Impact factor: 32.419
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: E Gerbaud; H Cochet; E Bullier; C Ragot; S H Gilbert; H Douard; Y Pucheu; F Laurent; P Coste; L Bordenave; M Montaudon Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Arthur E Stillman; Matthijs Oudkerk; David A Bluemke; Menko Jan de Boer; Jens Bremerich; Ernest V Garcia; Matthias Gutberlet; Pim van der Harst; W Gregory Hundley; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Dirkjan Kuijpers; Raymond Y Kwong; Eike Nagel; Stamatios Lerakis; John Oshinski; Jean-François Paul; Riemer H J A Slart; Vinod Thourani; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Bernd J Wintersperger Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 2.357