Literature DB >> 18208849

MR-IMPACT: comparison of perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance with single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease in a multicentre, multivendor, randomized trial.

Juerg Schwitter1, Christian M Wacker, Albert C van Rossum, Massimo Lombardi, Nidal Al-Saadi, Hakan Ahlstrom, Thorsten Dill, Henrik B W Larsson, Scott D Flamm, Moritz Marquardt, Lars Johansson.   

Abstract

AIMS: To determine in a multicentre, multivendor trial the diagnostic performance for perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance (perfusion-CMR) in comparison with coronary X-ray angiography (CXA) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). METHODS AND
RESULTS: Of 241 eligible patients from 18 centres, 234 were randomly dosed with 0.01, 0.025, 0.05, 0.075, or 0.1 mmol/kg Gd-DTPA-BMA (Omniscantrade mark, GE-Healthcare) per stress (0.42 mg/kg adenosine) and rest perfusion study. Coronary artery disease (CAD) was defined as diameter stenosis > or =50% on quantitative CXA. Five CMR and eight SPECT studies (of 225 complete studies) were excluded from analyses due to inadequate quality (three blinded readers scored per modality). The comparison of CMR vs. SPECT was based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Perfusion-CMR at the optimal CM dose (0.1 mmol/kg) had similar performance as SPECT, if only the SPECT studies of the 42 patients with this dose were considered [area under ROC curve (AUC): 0.86 +/- 0.06 vs. 0.75 +/- 0.09 for SPECT, P = 0.12]; however, diagnostic performance of perfusion-CMR was better vs. the entire SPECT population (AUC: 0.67 +/- 0.05, n = 212, P = 0.013).
CONCLUSIONS: In this multicentre, multivendor trial, ROC analyses suggest perfusion-CMR as a valuable alternative to SPECT for CAD detection showing equal performance in the head-to-head comparison. Comparing perfusion-CMR with the entire SPECT population suggests CMR superiority over SPECT, which warrants further evaluation in larger trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18208849     DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm617

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J        ISSN: 0195-668X            Impact factor:   29.983


  192 in total

Review 1.  The NICE guidelines on the assessment of chest pain.

Authors:  Khaled Alfakih; Sven Plein
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 5.344

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:  Circulation       Date:  2010-05-17       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography.

Authors:  Benjamin Y C Cheong
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2010

4.  Towards a noninvasive anatomical and functional diagnostic work-up of patients with suspected coronary artery disease.

Authors:  J G J Groothuis; A M Beek; M R Meijerink; S L Brinckman; M B M Hofman; A C van Rossum
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 5.  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 6.  Assessment of coronary blood flow with computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Karl H Schuleri; Richard T George; Albert C Lardo
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease: PET is superior to SPECT: Pro.

Authors:  Rob S B Beanlands; George Youssef
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 5.952

8.  Reperfusion injury components and manifestations determined by cardiovascular MR and MDCT imaging.

Authors:  Maythem Saeed; Steve Hetts; Mark Wilson
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2010-01-28

Review 9.  Role of cardiac MRI in diabetes.

Authors:  Ravi V Shah; Siddique A Abbasi; Raymond Y Kwong
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.931

10.  Diagnostic accuracy of stress perfusion CMR in comparison with quantitative coronary angiography: fully quantitative, semiquantitative, and qualitative assessment.

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
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.