PURPOSE: To compare the utility of phase contrast MR imaging (PC-MRI) for assessment of pulmonary flow and pressure estimation with that of right heart catheterization and echocardiography (cardiac US) in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients with suspected PAH underwent PC-MRI, cardiac US, and right heart catheterization. In each patient, PC-MRI was acquired by cine 2D-PC method on a 1.5 Tesla scanner, and stroke volume (SV) and pulmonary arterial systolic pressure (PASP) were assessed by using the modified Bernoulli's equation. To evaluate the agreements of SV and PASP among the three methods, correlations and limits of agreement among the three methods were statistically assessed by using the Bland-Altman's analyses. RESULTS: The correlations and limits of agreement for SV and PASP between PC-MRI and catheterization (r = 0.96, r(2) = 0.94, 1.1 +/- 6.9 mL and r = 0.94, r(2) = 0.88, -3.2 +/- 14.5 mmHg, respectively) were better than between cardiac US and catheterization (r = 0.01, r(2) < 0.01, 8.9 +/- 42.1 mL and r = 0.86, r(2) = 0.72, -5.9 +/- 27.7 mmHg, respectively). CONCLUSION: PC-MRI is more compatible with right heart catheterization than cardiac US in pulmonary flow and pressure estimation.
PURPOSE: To compare the utility of phase contrast MR imaging (PC-MRI) for assessment of pulmonary flow and pressure estimation with that of right heart catheterization and echocardiography (cardiac US) in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients with suspected PAH underwent PC-MRI, cardiac US, and right heart catheterization. In each patient, PC-MRI was acquired by cine 2D-PC method on a 1.5 Tesla scanner, and stroke volume (SV) and pulmonary arterial systolic pressure (PASP) were assessed by using the modified Bernoulli's equation. To evaluate the agreements of SV and PASP among the three methods, correlations and limits of agreement among the three methods were statistically assessed by using the Bland-Altman's analyses. RESULTS: The correlations and limits of agreement for SV and PASP between PC-MRI and catheterization (r = 0.96, r(2) = 0.94, 1.1 +/- 6.9 mL and r = 0.94, r(2) = 0.88, -3.2 +/- 14.5 mmHg, respectively) were better than between cardiac US and catheterization (r = 0.01, r(2) < 0.01, 8.9 +/- 42.1 mL and r = 0.86, r(2) = 0.72, -5.9 +/- 27.7 mmHg, respectively). CONCLUSION: PC-MRI is more compatible with right heart catheterization than cardiac US in pulmonary flow and pressure estimation.
Authors: Gert Klug; Sebastian Johannes Reinstadler; Hans-Josef Feistritzer; Christian Kremser; Johannes P Schwaiger; Martin Reindl; Johannes Mair; Silvana Müller; Agnes Mayr; Wolfgang-Michael Franz; Bernhard Metzler Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-09-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: M Agustina Sciancalepore; Francesco Maffessanti; Amit R Patel; Mardi Gomberg-Maitland; Sonal Chandra; Benjamin H Freed; Enrico G Caiani; Roberto M Lang; Victor Mor-Avi Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-06-22 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Octavia Bane; Sanjiv J Shah; Michael J Cuttica; Jeremy D Collins; Senthil Selvaraj; Neil R Chatterjee; Christoph Guetter; James C Carr; Timothy J Carroll Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Marius Berman; Deepa Gopalan; Linda Sharples; Nick Screaton; Caroline Maccan; Karen Sheares; Joanna Pepke-Zaba; John Dunning; Steven Tsui; David P Jenkins Journal: Pulm Circ Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 3.017
Authors: Andrew J Swift; Jim M Wild; Scott K Nagle; Alejandro Roldán-Alzate; Christopher J François; Sean Fain; Kevin Johnson; Dave Capener; Edwin J R van Beek; David G Kiely; Kang Wang; Mark L Schiebler Journal: J Thorac Imaging Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 3.000