Literature DB >> 15798172

Comparison of hybrid echo-planar imaging and FLASH myocardial perfusion cardiovascular MR imaging.

Andrew G Elkington1, Peter D Gatehouse, Timothy M Cannell, James C Moon, Sanjay K Prasad, David N Firmin, Dudley J Pennell.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare fast single-shot gradient-echo (FLASH) and hybrid echo-planar imaging (EPI) magnetic resonance (MR) technologies regarding the relative contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), spatiotemporal resolution, size of inducible perfusion defects, and presence of artifacts in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Fifteen patients with CAD underwent rest and adenosine stress gadolinium first-pass perfusion cardiovascular MR examinations with EPI and FLASH. The study was approved by the local ethics committee, and each subject gave written informed consent. The spatial resolution of the two sequences was made similar in nine patients, and the temporal resolution was made similar in six. The images were assessed for CNR, artifact, and size of inducible perfusion defects. The CNR was significantly higher with the EPI sequence, whether matched for spatial (32 vs 22 [46%], P < .001) or temporal (35 vs 23 [51%], P < .001) resolution. There was no significant difference in scoring for artifact or area and transmural extent of inducible perfusion defects with EPI and FLASH, whether matched for temporal or spatial resolution. Further work is warranted to determine the relative diagnostic accuracy of the two techniques. (c) RSNA, 2005.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15798172     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2351040360

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  8 in total

Review 1.  Myocardial perfusion imaging by cardiac magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Juerg Schwitter
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  High-resolution myocardial perfusion imaging at 3 T: comparison to 1.5 T in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  K Strach; C Meyer; D Thomas; C P Naehle; C Schmitz; H Litt; A Bernstein; B Cheng; H Schild; T Sommer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  High-resolution myocardial stress perfusion at 3 T in patients with suspected coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Carsten Meyer; Katharina Strach; Daniel Thomas; Harold Litt; Claas P Nähle; Klaus Tiemann; Ulrich Schwenger; Hans H Schild; Torsten Sommer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-09-13       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance: Comparison of an advanced, high-resolution and a standard sequence.

Authors:  Geraint Morton; Masaki Ishida; Andreas Schuster; Shazia Hussain; Tobias Schaeffter; Amedeo Chiribiri; Eike Nagel
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2012-06-09       Impact factor: 5.364

5.  Automatic postprocessing for the assessment of quantitative human myocardial perfusion using MRI.

Authors:  Andreas Max Weng; Christian Oliver Ritter; Joachim Lotz; Meinrad Joachim Beer; Dietbert Hahn; Herbert Köstler
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Evaluation of the microcirculation: advances in cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Amit R Patel; Frederick H Epstein; Christopher M Kramer
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2008 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 7.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance physics for clinicians: Part II.

Authors:  John D Biglands; Aleksandra Radjenovic; John P Ridgway
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 8.  Myocardial first-pass perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance: history, theory, and current state of the art.

Authors:  Bernhard L Gerber; Subha V Raman; Krishna Nayak; Frederick H Epstein; Pedro Ferreira; Leon Axel; Dara L Kraitchman
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2008-04-28       Impact factor: 5.364

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.