| Literature DB >> 28547666 |
R van Dijk1,2, D Kuijpers1,3, T A M Kaandorp3, P R M van Dijkman3, R Vliegenthart1, P van der Harst1,2, M Oudkerk4.
Abstract
The antagonistic effects of caffeine on adenosine receptors are a possible cause of false-negative stress perfusion imaging. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of coffee intake <4 h prior to stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in regadenoson- versus adenosine-induced hyperemia as measured with T1-mapping. 98 consecutive patients with suspected coronary artery disease referred for either adenosine or regadenoson perfusion CMR were included in this analysis. Twenty-four patients reported coffee consumption <4 h before CMR (15 patients with adenosine, and 9 patients with regadenoson); 74 patients reported no coffee intake (50 patients with adenosine, and 24 patients with regadenoson). T1 mapping was performed using a modified look-locker inversion recovery sequence. T1 reactivity was determined by subtracting T1rest from T1stress. T1rest, T1stress, and T1 reactivity in patients referred for regadenoson perfusion CMR were not significantly different when comparing patients with <4 h coffee intake and patients who reported no coffee intake (976 ± 4 ms, 1019 ± 48 ms, and 4.4 ± 3.2% vs 971 ± 33 ms, 1023 ± 43 ms, and 5.4 ± 2.4%) (p = 0.70, 0.79, and 0.40), and similar to values in patients without coffee intake undergoing adenosine CMR. In patients with <4 h coffee intake, T1stress, and T1 reactivity were significantly lower for adenosine (898 ± 51 ms, and -7.8 ± 5.0%) compared to regadenoson perfusion CMR (p < 0.001). Coffee intake <4 h prior to regadenoson perfusion CMR has no effect on stress-induced hyperemia as measured with T1 mapping.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR); Coronary artery disease (CAD); T1 mapping
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28547666 PMCID: PMC5682854 DOI: 10.1007/s10554-017-1157-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging ISSN: 1569-5794 Impact factor: 2.357
Fig. 1Flowchart of the inclusion and exclusion of patients. Motion artefacts were mainly due to incapability of patients with COPD to perform adequate breath holds
Fig. 2Overview of the cardiac CMR protocol. Cine function imaging is followed by native T1 mapping during rest and stress, 40 s stress perfusion imaging, and Late Gadolinium Enhancement images. Stressor agent was either adenosine (continuous infusion for 3 min before stress perfusion acquisition) or regadenoson (single bolus before stress perfusion acquisition)
Fig. 3Myocardial ischemia assessment in two patients who consumed coffee several hours before Regadenoson perfusion CMR study. Top row 84 year-old women who had coffee < 4 h before the stress study (T1 reactivity of 4.6%). Native T1 mapping (a), peak perfusion (b), and late perfusion (c) images are shown. The perfusion image showed a transmural perfusion defect in the inferior wall in multiple segments, consistent with myocardial ischemia. This perfusion defect was caused by a significant stenosis in the right coronary artery, for which the patient received PCI treatment. Bottom row 75 year-old men who had coffee 2 h before the stress study (T1 reactivity of 4.2%). Native T1 mapping (d), peak perfusion (e), and late perfusion (f) images are shown. The perfusion study showed one segmental perfusion defect in the lateral wall. This patient was treated medically.
Patient characteristics and hemodynamics
| Total (n = 98) | Adenosine control* (n = 50) | Regadenoson control (n = 24) | Adenosine caffeine <4 h* (n = 15) | Regadenoson caffeine <4 h (n = 9) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 65 ± 11 | 67 ± 11 | 66 ± 11 | 67 ± 11 | 59 ± 11 |
| Male | 16 (49) | 22 (44) | 11 (46) | 8 (53) | 5 (56) |
| Systolic RR rest (mm Hg) | 148 ± 20 | 146 ± 28 | 147 ± 19 | 144 ± 20 | 151 ± 21 |
| Systolic RR stress (mm Hg) | 135 ± 20 | 142 ± 23 | 133 ± 19 | 139 ± 15 | 139 ± 23 |
| Diastolic RR rest (mm Hg) | 88 ± 12 | 85 ± 19 | 89 ± 12 | 83 ± 9 | 85 ± 9 |
| Diastolic RR stress (mm Hg) | 81 ± 12 | 80 ± 10 | 82 ± 11 | 79 ± 7 | 79 ± 14 |
| HR rest (bpm) | 78 ± 18 | 76 ± 15 | 82 ± 18 | 70 ± 7 | 67 ± 12 |
| HR stress (bpm) | 100 ± 20 | 87 ± 14 | 107 ± 18 | 81 ± 10 | 84 ± 12 |
| HRR† (%) | 21 | 16 | 32 | 16 | 26 |
| Systolic RR response†† (%) | −5 ± 10 | −2 ± 12 | −9 ± 7 | −3 ± 7 | −8 ± 5 |
| Diastolic RR response‡ (%) | −5 ± 10 | −4 ± 11 | −7 ± 9 | −4 ± 8 | −8 ± 10 |
HRR—% change in HR from rest to stress
††Systolic RR response—% change in systolic RR
‡Diastolic RR response—% change in diastolic RR. Results are presented as mean ± standard deviation or n (%)
*Results as previously reported by Kuijpers et al. [14]
Rest-Stress T1-mapping results
| Total (n = 98) | Adenosine Control* (n = 50) | Regadenoson control (n = 24) | Adenosine caffeine <4 h* (n = 15) | Regadenoson caffeine <4 h (n = 9) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 rest (ms) | 975 ± 38 | 977 ± 41 | 971 ± 33 | 975 ± 42 | 976 ± 34 |
| T1 stress (ms) | 1001 ± 61 | 1018 ± 40 | 1023 ± 43 | 898 ± 51 | 1019 ± 48 |
| T1-reactivity (%) | 2.7 ± 5.5 | 4.3 ± 2.8 | 5.4 ± 2.4 | −7.8 ± 5.0 | 4.4 ± 3.2 |
Results are presented as mean ± standard deviation
*Results as previously reported by Kuijpers et al. [14]