PURPOSE: To investigate and compare several quantification methods of myocardial perfusion measurements, paying special attention to the relation between the techniques and the required measurement duration. METHODS: Seven patients underwent contrast-enhanced rest and stress cardiac perfusion measurements at 3T. Three slices were acquired in each patient and were divided into 16 segments, leading to 112 rest and stress data curves, which were analyzed using various tracer kinetic models as well as a model-free deconvolution. Plasma flow, plasma volume, and myocardial perfusion reserve were analyzed for the complete acquisition as well as for the first pass data only. RESULTS: Deconvolution analysis yielded stable results for both rest and stress analysis, while Fermi and one compartment models agree well for first pass data (rest measurements only) and prolonged data acquisition (stress measurements only). More complex models do not yield satisfactory results for the short measurement times investigated in this study. CONCLUSIONS: When performing MRI-based quantification of myocardial perfusion, care must be taken that the method used is appropriate for the time frame under investigation. When a numerical deconvolution is used instead of tracer kinetic models, more stable results are obtained.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To investigate and compare several quantification methods of myocardial perfusion measurements, paying special attention to the relation between the techniques and the required measurement duration. METHODS: Seven patients underwent contrast-enhanced rest and stress cardiac perfusion measurements at 3T. Three slices were acquired in each patient and were divided into 16 segments, leading to 112 rest and stress data curves, which were analyzed using various tracer kinetic models as well as a model-free deconvolution. Plasma flow, plasma volume, and myocardial perfusion reserve were analyzed for the complete acquisition as well as for the first pass data only. RESULTS: Deconvolution analysis yielded stable results for both rest and stress analysis, while Fermi and one compartment models agree well for first pass data (rest measurements only) and prolonged data acquisition (stress measurements only). More complex models do not yield satisfactory results for the short measurement times investigated in this study. CONCLUSIONS: When performing MRI-based quantification of myocardial perfusion, care must be taken that the method used is appropriate for the time frame under investigation. When a numerical deconvolution is used instead of tracer kinetic models, more stable results are obtained.
Authors: Brendan L Eck; Raymond F Muzic; Jacob Levi; Hao Wu; Rachid Fahmi; Yuemeng Li; Anas Fares; Mani Vembar; Amar Dhanantwari; Hiram G Bezerra; David L Wilson Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2018-09-13 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: G J Pelgrim; A Handayani; H Dijkstra; N H J Prakken; R H J A Slart; M Oudkerk; P M A Van Ooijen; R Vliegenthart; P E Sijens Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2016-03-10 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Rudolf L M van Herten; Amedeo Chiribiri; Marcel Breeuwer; Mitko Veta; Cian M Scannell Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2022-02-26 Impact factor: 13.828