Literature DB >> 22357884

Systolic versus diastolic acquisition in myocardial perfusion MR imaging.

Manish Motwani1, Timothy A Fairbairn, Abdulghani Larghat, Adam N Mather, John D Biglands, Aleksandra Radjenovic, John P Greenwood, Sven Plein.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare myocardial blood flow (MBF) at systole and diastole and determine the diagnostic accuracy of both phases in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease (CAD).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the regional ethics committee, and all patients gave written informed consent. After coronary angiography, 40 patients (27 men; mean age, 64 years ± 8) underwent stress-rest perfusion magnetic resonance (MR) imaging at 1.5 T, with images aquired simultaneously at end systole and middiastole. Patients were classified as having CAD (stenosis .70%) or no significant CAD. In patients with CAD, myocardial segments were classified as stenosis-dependent (downstream of significant stenosis) or remote. MBF and myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) were calculated for each segment, and mean values in each phase were compared with paired t tests. The diagnostic accuracy of each phase was determined with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
RESULTS: Twenty-one of the 40 patients (53%) had CAD. Resting MBF was similar in both phases for patients with and patients without CAD (P > .05). Stress MBF was greater in diastole than systole in normal, remote, and stenosis-dependent segments (3.75 mL/g/min ± 1.50 vs 3.15 mL/g/min ± 1.10, respectively, for normal segments; 2.75 mL/g/min ± 1.20 vs 2.38 mL/g/min ± 0.99, respectively, for remote segments; 2.49 mL/g/min ± 1.07 vs 2.23 mL/g/min ± 0.90, respectively, for stenosis-dependent segments; P <.01). MPR was greater in diastole than systole in all segment groups (P < .05). The diagnostic accuracies at diastole and systole were similar (area under the ROC curve = 0.79 and 0.82, respectively; P = .30).
CONCLUSION: Myocardial perfusion MR estimates of stress MBF and MPR were greater in diastole than systole in patients with and patients without CAD. However, both phases had similar diagnostic accuracy. These observations may be relevant to other dynamic perfusion methods, including computed tomography and echocardiography. © RSNA, 2012.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22357884     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11111549

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  18 in total

Review 1.  Reasons and implications of agreements and disagreements between coronary flow reserve, fractional flow reserve, and myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Manish Motwani; Mahsaw Motlagh; Anuj Gupta; Daniel S Berman; Piotr J Slomka
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  Whole-heart, ungated, free-breathing, cardiac-phase-resolved myocardial perfusion MRI by using Continuous Radial Interleaved simultaneous Multi-slice acquisitions at sPoiled steady-state (CRIMP).

Authors:  Ye Tian; Jason Mendes; Brent Wilson; Alexander Ross; Ravi Ranjan; Edward DiBella; Ganesh Adluru
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  Influence of the cardiac cycle on time-intensity curves using multislice dynamic magnetic resonance perfusion.

Authors:  Alain Nchimi; Isabelle Mancini; Thomas K Y Broussaud
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-06-14       Impact factor: 2.357

4.  Rapid rest/stress regadenoson ungated perfusion CMR for detection of coronary artery disease in patients with atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Erik T Bieging; I Haider; G Adluru; L Chang; P Suksaranjit; D Likhite; A Shaaban; L Jensen; B D Wilson; C J McGann; E DiBella
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-05-20       Impact factor: 2.357

5.  All-systolic non-ECG-gated myocardial perfusion MRI: Feasibility of multi-slice continuous first-pass imaging.

Authors:  Behzad Sharif; Reza Arsanjani; Rohan Dharmakumar; C Noel Bairey Merz; Daniel S Berman; Debiao Li
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2015-06-06       Impact factor: 4.668

6.  Quantitative 3D myocardial perfusion with an efficient arterial input function.

Authors:  Jason Kraig Mendes; Ganesh Adluru; Devavrat Likhite; Merlin J Fair; Peter D Gatehouse; Ye Tian; Apoorva Pedgaonkar; Brent Wilson; Edward V R DiBella
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 4.668

7.  Quantification of myocardial perfusion with self-gated cardiovascular magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Devavrat Likhite; Ganesh Adluru; Nan Hu; Chris McGann; Edward DiBella
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 5.364

8.  Quantification of myocardial blood flow with cardiovascular magnetic resonance throughout the cardiac cycle.

Authors:  Manish Motwani; Ananth Kidambi; Akhlaque Uddin; Steven Sourbron; John P Greenwood; Sven Plein
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 5.364

9.  Rapid ungated myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance: preliminary diagnostic accuracy.

Authors:  Alexis Harrison; Ganesh Adluru; Kavitha Damal; Akram M Shaaban; Brent Wilson; Daniel Kim; Chris McGann; Nassir F Marrouche; Edward V R DiBella
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 5.364

10.  Systolic ShMOLLI myocardial T1-mapping for improved robustness to partial-volume effects and applications in tachyarrhythmias.

Authors:  Vanessa M Ferreira; Rohan S Wijesurendra; Alexander Liu; Andreas Greiser; Barbara Casadei; Matthew D Robson; Stefan Neubauer; Stefan K Piechnik
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 5.364

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.