Literature DB >> 1729867

Feasibility of high-dose dipyridamole-magnetic resonance imaging for detection of coronary artery disease and comparison with coronary angiography.

F M Baer1, K Smolarz, M Jungehülsing, P Theissen, U Sechtem, H Schicha, H H Hilger.   

Abstract

To assess the feasibility, safety and usefulness of gradient-echo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with pharmacologic stress testing for the detection of coronary artery disease, 23 patients without previous myocardial infarction but with significant stenosis (greater than 70% diameter stenosis) of greater than or equal to 1 major coronary artery were selected for dipyridamole-MRI stress testing. Each patient underwent MRI at rest, and high-dose dipyridamole-MRI (0.75 mg/kg over 10 minutes) of corresponding basal and midventricular short-axis tomograms. Additionally, these patients performed symptom-limited exercise stress tests. All short-axis tomograms were evaluated on a standardized segmental basis by grading each segment as normal, hypokinetic, akinetic or dyskinetic. Dipyridamole-MRI was considered pathologic if segmental wall motion deteriorated by greater than or equal to 1 grade after dipyridamole. For comparison with coronary angiography, segmental wall motion gradings were related to the respective coronary artery territories in the short-axis plane. Pathologic dipyridamole-MRI was obtained in 18 of 23 (78%) patients. For 1- and 2-vessel diseases, sensitivity was 69 and 90%, respectively. Exercise stress tests were pathologic in 14 of 23 (66%) patients. For 1- and 2-vessel diseases, sensitivity of exercise stress test was 58% (7 of 12 patients) and 77% (7 of 9), respectively. Sensitivity/specificity of dipyridamole-MRI for the localization of the stenosed coronary artery was 78/100% for left anterior descending, 73/100% for left circumflex, and 88/87% for right coronary artery stenoses. It is concluded that dipyridamole-MRI is a feasible nonexercise-dependent test for detection and localization of functionally significant coronary artery disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1729867     DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(92)90675-o

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  10 in total

1.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

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

Review 2.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

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

Review 3.  Cardiac magnetic resonance stress testing: results and prognosis.

Authors:  Amedeo Chiribiri; Nuno Bettencourt; Eike Nagel
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 4.  The role of magnetic resonance in the evaluation of functional results after CABG/PTCA.

Authors:  A C van Rossum; M A Galjee; T Doesburg; M Hofman; J Valk
Journal:  Int J Card Imaging       Date:  1993

Review 5.  [Magnetic resonance imaging and spiral computed tomography in the diagnosis and follow-up of adults with congenital heart and vessel disease].

Authors:  H Kaemmerer; T Ibrahim; M Schwaiger; J Hess
Journal:  Herz       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 6.  Cardiac stress MR imaging with dobutamine.

Authors:  K Strach; C Meyer; H Schild; T Sommer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-05-20       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Identification of hemodynamically significant coronary artery stenoses by dipyridamole-magnetic resonance imaging and 99mTc-methoxyisobutyl-isonitrile-SPECT.

Authors:  F M Baer; K Smolarz; P Theissen; E Voth; H Schicha; U Sechtem
Journal:  Int J Card Imaging       Date:  1993-06

Review 8.  Magnetic resonance imaging of acquired cardiac disease.

Authors:  C L Carrol; C B Higgins; G R Caputo
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  1996

Review 9.  Assessment of myocardial viability with two-dimensional echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  J R Lindner; S Kaul
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1996 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 10.  Current clinical relevance of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and its relationship to nuclear cardiology.

Authors:  E E van der Wall; J Bax
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.872

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.