Andreas Schuster1, Matthew Sinclair2, Niloufar Zarinabad2, Masaki Ishida2, Jeroen P H M van den Wijngaard3, Matthias Paul2, Pepijn van Horssen3, Shazia T Hussain2, Divaka Perera4, Tobias Schaeffter2, Jos A E Spaan3, Maria Siebes3, Eike Nagel5, Amedeo Chiribiri2. 1. Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, King's College London British Heart Foundation (BHF) Centre of Excellence, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Wellcome Trust and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) Medical Engineering Centre, The Rayne Institute, St. Thomas' Hospital, Lambeth Palace Road, London, UK Department of Cardiology and Pneumology and German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK, Partner Site Göttingen), Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany andreas_schuster@gmx.net. 2. Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, King's College London British Heart Foundation (BHF) Centre of Excellence, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Wellcome Trust and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) Medical Engineering Centre, The Rayne Institute, St. Thomas' Hospital, Lambeth Palace Road, London, UK. 3. Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, King's College London British Heart Foundation (BHF) Centre of Excellence, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Wellcome Trust and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) Medical Engineering Centre, The Rayne Institute, St. Thomas' Hospital, Lambeth Palace Road, London, UK King's College London BHF Centre of Excellence, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre and Department of Cardiology, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 5. Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, King's College London British Heart Foundation (BHF) Centre of Excellence, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Wellcome Trust and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) Medical Engineering Centre, The Rayne Institute, St. Thomas' Hospital, Lambeth Palace Road, London, UK Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Goethe University Frankfurt and German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK, Partner Site Rhine-Main), Frankfurt, Germany.
Abstract
AIMS: To assess the feasibility of high-resolution quantitative cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) voxel-wise perfusion imaging using clinical 1.5 and 3 T sequences and to validate it using fluorescently labelled microspheres in combination with a state of the art imaging cryomicrotome in a novel, isolated blood-perfused MR-compatible free beating pig heart model without respiratory motion. METHODS AND RESULTS: MR perfusion imaging was performed in pig hearts at 1.5 (n = 4) and 3 T (n = 4). Images were acquired at physiological flow ('rest'), reduced flow ('ischaemia'), and during adenosine-induced hyperaemia ('stress') in control and coronary occlusion conditions. Fluorescently labelled microspheres and known coronary myocardial blood flow represented the reference standards for quantitative perfusion validation. For the comparison with microspheres, the LV was divided into 48 segments based on a subdivision of the 16 AHA segments into subendocardial, midmyocardial, and subepicardial subsegments. Perfusion quantification of the time-signal intensity curves was performed using a Fermi function deconvolution. High-resolution quantitative voxel-wise perfusion assessment was able to distinguish between occluded and remote myocardium (P < 0.001) and between rest, ischaemia, and stress perfusion conditions at 1.5 T (P < 0.001) and at 3 T (P < 0.001). CMR-MBF estimates correlated well with the microspheres at the AHA segmental level at 1.5 T (r = 0.94, P < 0.001) and at 3 T (r = 0.96, P < 0.001) and at the subendocardial, midmyocardial, and subepicardial level at 1.5 T (r = 0.93, r = 0.9, r = 0.88, P < 0.001, respectively) and at 3 T (r = 0.91, r = 0.95, r = 0.84, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: CMR-derived voxel-wise quantitative blood flow assessment is feasible and very accurate compared with microspheres. This technique is suitable for both clinically used field strengths and may provide the tools to assess extent and severity of myocardial ischaemia. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: To assess the feasibility of high-resolution quantitative cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) voxel-wise perfusion imaging using clinical 1.5 and 3 T sequences and to validate it using fluorescently labelled microspheres in combination with a state of the art imaging cryomicrotome in a novel, isolated blood-perfused MR-compatible free beating pig heart model without respiratory motion. METHODS AND RESULTS: MR perfusion imaging was performed in pig hearts at 1.5 (n = 4) and 3 T (n = 4). Images were acquired at physiological flow ('rest'), reduced flow ('ischaemia'), and during adenosine-induced hyperaemia ('stress') in control and coronary occlusion conditions. Fluorescently labelled microspheres and known coronary myocardial blood flow represented the reference standards for quantitative perfusion validation. For the comparison with microspheres, the LV was divided into 48 segments based on a subdivision of the 16 AHA segments into subendocardial, midmyocardial, and subepicardial subsegments. Perfusion quantification of the time-signal intensity curves was performed using a Fermi function deconvolution. High-resolution quantitative voxel-wise perfusion assessment was able to distinguish between occluded and remote myocardium (P < 0.001) and between rest, ischaemia, and stress perfusion conditions at 1.5 T (P < 0.001) and at 3 T (P < 0.001). CMR-MBF estimates correlated well with the microspheres at the AHA segmental level at 1.5 T (r = 0.94, P < 0.001) and at 3 T (r = 0.96, P < 0.001) and at the subendocardial, midmyocardial, and subepicardial level at 1.5 T (r = 0.93, r = 0.9, r = 0.88, P < 0.001, respectively) and at 3 T (r = 0.91, r = 0.95, r = 0.84, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: CMR-derived voxel-wise quantitative blood flow assessment is feasible and very accurate compared with microspheres. This technique is suitable for both clinically used field strengths and may provide the tools to assess extent and severity of myocardial ischaemia. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Manish Motwani; Neil Maredia; Timothy A Fairbairn; Sebastian Kozerke; Aleksandra Radjenovic; John P Greenwood; Sven Plein Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-04-12 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: E Nagel; H B Lehmkuhl; W Bocksch; C Klein; U Vogel; E Frantz; A Ellmer; S Dreysse; E Fleck Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-02-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Geraint Morton; Amedeo Chiribiri; Masaki Ishida; Shazia T Hussain; Andreas Schuster; Andreas Indermuehle; Divaka Perera; Juhani Knuuti; Stacey Baker; Erik Hedström; Paul Schleyer; Michael O'Doherty; Sally Barrington; Eike Nagel Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jim O'Doherty; Eva Sammut; Paul Schleyer; James Stirling; Muhummad Sohaib Nazir; Paul K Marsden; Amedeo Chiribiri Journal: Eur J Hybrid Imaging Date: 2017-10-12
Authors: Gert Jan Pelgrim; Marco Das; Sjoerd van Tuijl; Marly van Assen; Frits W Prinzen; Marco Stijnen; Matthijs Oudkerk; Joachim E Wildberger; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-05-23 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Polyxeni Gkontra; Wahbi K El-Bouri; Kerri-Ann Norton; Andrés Santos; Aleksander S Popel; Stephen J Payne; Alicia G Arroyo Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Cian M Scannell; Mitko Veta; Adriana D M Villa; Eva C Sammut; Jack Lee; Marcel Breeuwer; Amedeo Chiribiri Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 4.813