Literature DB >> 22340821

A quantitative pixel-wise measurement of myocardial blood flow by contrast-enhanced first-pass CMR perfusion imaging: microsphere validation in dogs and feasibility study in humans.

Li-Yueh Hsu1, Daniel W Groves, Anthony H Aletras, Peter Kellman, Andrew E Arai.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate fully quantitative myocardial blood flow (MBF) at a pixel level based on contrast-enhanced first-pass cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in dogs and in patients.
BACKGROUND: Microspheres can quantify MBF in subgram regions of interest, but CMR perfusion imaging may be able to quantify MBF and differentiate blood flow at a much higher resolution.
METHODS: First-pass CMR perfusion imaging was performed in a dog model with local hyperemia induced by intracoronary adenosine. Fluorescent microspheres were the reference standard for MBF validation. CMR perfusion imaging was also performed on patients with significant coronary artery disease (CAD) by invasive coronary angiography. Myocardial time-signal intensity curves of the images were quantified on a pixel-by-pixel basis using a model-constrained deconvolution analysis.
RESULTS: Qualitatively, color CMR perfusion pixel maps were comparable to microsphere MBF bull's-eye plots in all animals. Pixel-wise CMR MBF estimates correlated well against subgram (0.49 ± 0.14 g) microsphere measurements (r = 0.87 to 0.90) but showed minor underestimation of MBF. To reduce bias due to misregistration and minimize issues related to repeated measures, 1 hyperemic and 1 remote sector per animal were compared with the microsphere MBF, which improved the correlation (r = 0.97 to 0.98), and the bias was close to zero. Sector-wise and pixel-wise CMR MBF estimates also correlated well (r = 0.97). In patients, color CMR stress perfusion pixel maps showed regional blood flow decreases and transmural perfusion gradients in territories served by stenotic coronary arteries. MBF estimates in endocardial versus epicardial subsectors, and ischemic versus remote sectors, were all significantly different (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial blood flow can be quantified at the pixel level (∼32 μl of myocardium) on CMR perfusion images, and results compared well with microsphere measurements. High-resolution pixel-wise CMR perfusion maps can quantify transmural perfusion gradients in patients with CAD. Copyright Â
© 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22340821      PMCID: PMC3460374          DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2011.07.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1876-7591


  47 in total

1.  Automated registration of dynamic MR images for the quantification of myocardial perfusion.

Authors:  L M Bidaut; J P Vallée
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Echo-planar magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging: parametric map analysis and comparison with thallium SPECT.

Authors:  J R Panting; P D Gatehouse; G Z Yang; M Jerosch-Herold; N Wilke; D N Firmin; D J Pennell
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.813

3.  Myocardial blood flow quantification with MRI by model-independent deconvolution.

Authors:  Michael Jerosch-Herold; Cory Swingen; Ravi Teja Seethamraju
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced myocardial perfusion imaging using saturation-prepared TrueFISP.

Authors:  Wolfgang Günther Schreiber; Melanie Schmitt; Peter Kalden; Oliver Klaus Mohrs; Karl-Friedrich Kreitner; Manfred Thelen
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 5.  Spatial heterogeneity in the heart: recent insights and open questions.

Authors:  Ulrich K M Decking
Journal:  News Physiol Sci       Date:  2002-12

6.  Noninvasive detection of myocardial ischemia from perfusion reserve based on cardiovascular magnetic resonance.

Authors:  N Al-Saadi; E Nagel; M Gross; A Bornstedt; B Schnackenburg; C Klein; W Klimek; H Oswald; E Fleck
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000-03-28       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Assessment of coronary flow reserve: comparison between contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography.

Authors:  Tareq Ibrahim; Stephan G Nekolla; Karin Schreiber; Kenichi Odaka; Stefan Volz; Julinda Mehilli; Martin Güthlin; Wolfram Delius; Markus Schwaiger
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2002-03-06       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Assessment of myocardial perfusion in coronary artery disease by magnetic resonance: a comparison with positron emission tomography and coronary angiography.

Authors:  J Schwitter; D Nanz; S Kneifel; K Bertschinger; M Büchi; P R Knüsel; B Marincek; T F Lüscher; G K von Schulthess
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2001-05-08       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Limits of detection of regional differences in vasodilated flow in viable myocardium by first-pass magnetic resonance perfusion imaging.

Authors:  F J Klocke; O P Simonetti; R M Judd; R J Kim; K R Harris; S Hedjbeli; D S Fieno; S Miller; V Chen; M A Parker
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2001-11-13       Impact factor: 29.690

10.  Comparison of dobutamine stress magnetic resonance, adenosine stress magnetic resonance, and adenosine stress magnetic resonance perfusion.

Authors:  I Paetsch; C Jahnke; A Wahl; R Gebker; M Neuss; E Fleck; E Nagel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2004-08-02       Impact factor: 29.690

View more
  60 in total

Review 1.  Imaging lung perfusion.

Authors:  Susan R Hopkins; Mark O Wielpütz; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2012-05-17

Review 2.  Left main coronary artery disease: A review of the spectrum of noninvasive diagnostic modalities.

Authors:  Nishtha Sareen; Karthik Ananthasubramaniam
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Variability in quantitative cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion analysis.

Authors:  K Bratis; Eike Nagel
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 4.  PET/MRI: current state of the art and future potential for cardiovascular applications.

Authors:  Nebiyu Adenaw; Michael Salerno
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 5.952

5.  Free-breathing cardiac MR stress perfusion with real-time slice tracking.

Authors:  Tamer A Basha; Sébastien Roujol; Kraig V Kissinger; Beth Goddu; Sophie Berg; Warren J Manning; Reza Nezafat
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2013-10-07       Impact factor: 4.668

6.  Quantitative assessment of magnetic resonance derived myocardial perfusion measurements using advanced techniques: microsphere validation in an explanted pig heart system.

Authors:  Andreas Schuster; Niloufar Zarinabad; Masaki Ishida; Matthew Sinclair; Jeroen Phm van den Wijngaard; Geraint Morton; Gilion Ltf Hautvast; Boris Bigalke; Pepijn van Horssen; Nicolas Smith; Jos Ae Spaan; Maria Siebes; Amedeo Chiribiri; Eike Nagel
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 5.364

7.  A quantitative high resolution voxel-wise assessment of myocardial blood flow from contrast-enhanced first-pass magnetic resonance perfusion imaging: microsphere validation in a magnetic resonance compatible free beating explanted pig heart model.

Authors:  Andreas Schuster; Matthew Sinclair; Niloufar Zarinabad; Masaki Ishida; Jeroen P H M van den Wijngaard; Matthias Paul; Pepijn van Horssen; Shazia T Hussain; Divaka Perera; Tobias Schaeffter; Jos A E Spaan; Maria Siebes; Eike Nagel; Amedeo Chiribiri
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 6.875

Review 8.  Imaging the myocardial ischemic cascade.

Authors:  Arthur E Stillman; Matthijs Oudkerk; David A Bluemke; Menko Jan de Boer; Jens Bremerich; Ernest V Garcia; Matthias Gutberlet; Pim van der Harst; W Gregory Hundley; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Dirkjan Kuijpers; Raymond Y Kwong; Eike Nagel; Stamatios Lerakis; John Oshinski; Jean-François Paul; Riemer H J A Slart; Vinod Thourani; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Bernd J Wintersperger
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 2.357

9.  Assessment of coronary artery stenosis severity and location: quantitative analysis of transmural perfusion gradients by high-resolution MRI versus FFR.

Authors:  Amedeo Chiribiri; Gilion L T F Hautvast; Timothy Lockie; Andreas Schuster; Boris Bigalke; Luca Olivotti; Simon R Redwood; Marcel Breeuwer; Sven Plein; Eike Nagel
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2013-04-10

Review 10.  Challenges of cardiac image analysis in large-scale population-based studies.

Authors:  Pau Medrano-Gracia; Brett R Cowan; Avan Suinesiaputra; Alistair A Young
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 2.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.