| Literature DB >> 20525217 |
Kyle S McCommis1, Robert O'Connor, Donna Lesniak, Matt Lyons, Pamela K Woodard, Robert J Gropler, Jie Zheng.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of our newly developed cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) methods to quantify global and/or regional myocardial oxygen consumption rate (MVO2) at rest and during pharmacologically-induced vasodilation in normal volunteers.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20525217 PMCID: PMC2890683 DOI: 10.1186/1532-429X-12-34
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Figure 1Diagram of T2prep sequence for the measurement of myocardial T. The sequence begins with a T2prep module followed by a N-line of gradient-echo data acquisition using a flip angle of β. All pulses in T2prep module are composite pulses. The acquisition continues until the full k-space lines are collected. The second TE2 images are then acquired in the same manner, followed by the TE3, TE4, etc.
Fitting Parameters for the Calculation of Coronary Sinus and Myocardial Hyperemic OEF
| TE (ms) | Coronary Sinus | Myocardium | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | 2.42 | 4.25 | 3.94 | 2.52 | 2.69 | 2.83 |
| 36 | 4.78 | 5.27 | 4.05 | 3.76 | 3.22 | 2.89 |
| 48 | 7.25 | 6.33 | 4.17 | 4.57 | 3.57 | 2.93 |
| 60 | 9.55 | 7.32 | 4.28 | 5.09 | 3.80 | 2.95 |
| 72 | 11.54 | 8.18 | 4.37 | 5.45 | 3.95 | 2.97 |
T2 phantoms and T2 measurement results with T2prep and SE sequences
| Sequences | Phantom 1 | Phantom 2 | Phantom 3 | Phantom 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SE | 32.3 | 43.9 | 46.5 | 51.4 |
| T2prep | 32.3 | 43.5 | 46 | 51.7 |
| Errors (%) | 0 | -0.91 | -1.0 | 0.6 |
T1 values are shown in parenthesis.
Figure 2Time sequence of human study protocol.
Hemodynamic Data of the Volunteers and Resting CS OEF
| Heart Rate | Systolic Pressure | Rate-Pressure Product | Resting OEF | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rest | 72 ± 11 | 113 ± 6 | 8102 ± 1273 | 0.73 ± 0.03 |
| Adenosine | 110 ± 16† | 120 ± 13 | 13878 ± 1201† |
Values are presented as mean ± SD
†P < 0.001 for the comparison between rest and adenosine
Figure 3Examples of bright blood T2-weighted myocardial images at three different TEs, obtained from a volunteer during the adenosine infusion. In comparison, the TSE images collected is distorted by the fast heart rate and flow artifacts, which is not useful for further analysis.
Global Myocardial Perfusion and Oxygenation in Volunteers (Data is presented as mean (SD))
| Method | T2 | MBF | MBV | OEF | MVO2 | T2sen* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T2prep | Rest | 44 (6) | 0.89 (0.36) | 0.06 (0.02) | 0.73 (0.05) | 5.2 (1.7) | |
| Aden | 49 (5)† | 2.97 (0.75)† | 0.10 (0.02)† | 0.37 (0.05)† | 9.2 (2.4) ξ | 4.8(5.1) | |
| TSE | Rest | 55 (4)†† | 0.73 (0.05) | 5.2 (1.7) | |||
| Aden | 59 (4) † | 0.41(0.14)† | 10.4 (5.1) | 3.2(2.9) | |||
OEF at rest are values of coronary sinus in Table 2
MBF and MBV were calculated from the first-pass perfusion imaging data sets.
*T2sen or T2 sensitivity = percentage of T2 change/100% increase in MBF
Aden = Adenosine vasodilation
†P < 0.01 for comparison between rest and adenosine.
ξ P < 0.05 for comparison between rest and adenosine.
††P < 0.05 for comparison between T2prep and TSE methods.