Literature DB >> 30003181

Multimodality quantitative assessments of myocardial perfusion using dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance and 15O-labelled water positron emission tomography imaging.

G Papanastasiou1, M C Williams1, M R Dweck1, S Mirsadraee2, N Weir3, A Fletcher3, C Lucatelli3, D Patel4, E J R van Beek3, D E Newby1, S I K Semple1.   

Abstract

Kinetic modelling of myocardial perfusion imaging data allows the absolute quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) and can improve the diagnosis and clinical assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD). Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is considered the reference standard technique for absolute quantification, whilst oxygen-15 (15O)-water has been extensively implemented for MBF quantification. Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) has also been used for MBF quantification and showed comparable diagnostic performance against (15O)-water PET studies. We investigated for the first time the diagnostic performance of two different PET MBF analysis softwares PMOD and Carimas, for obstructive CAD detection against invasive clinical standard methods in 20 patients with known or suspected CAD. Fermi and distributed parameter modelling-derived MBF quantification from DCE-MRI was also compared against (15O)-water PET, in a subgroup of 6 patients. The sensitivity and specificity for PMOD was significantly superior for obstructive CAD detection in both per vessel (0.83, 0.90) and per patient (0.86, 0.75) analysis, against Carimas (0.75, 0.65), (0.81, 0.70), respectively. We showed strong, significant correlations between MR and PET MBF quantifications (r=0.83-0.92). However, DP and PMOD analysis demonstrated comparable and higher haemodynamic differences between obstructive versus (no, minor or non)-obstructive CAD, against Fermi and Carimas analysis. Our MR method assessments against the optimum PET reference standard technique for perfusion analysis showed promising results in per segment level and can support further multi-modality assessments in larger patient cohorts. Further MR against PET assessments may help to determine their comparative diagnostic performance for obstructive CAD detection.

Entities:  

Keywords:  15O-water PET; DCE-MRI; coronary artery disease; kinetic modelling

Year:  2018        PMID: 30003181      PMCID: PMC6037289          DOI: 10.1109/TRPMS.2018.2796626

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci        ISSN: 2469-7303


  44 in total

Review 1.  Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association.

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

Review 2.  Tracer kinetic modelling in MRI: estimating perfusion and capillary permeability.

Authors:  S P Sourbron; D L Buckley
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  A novel estimation method for physiological parameters in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: application of a distributed parameter model using Fourier-domain calculations.

Authors:  Anders Garpebring; Nils Ostlund; Mikael Karlsson
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2009-03-10       Impact factor: 10.048

4.  Generation of parametric image of regional myocardial blood flow using H(2)(15)O dynamic PET and a linear least-squares method.

Authors:  Jae Sung Lee; Dong Soo Lee; Ji Young Ahn; Jeong Seok Yeo; Gi Jeong Cheon; Seok-Ki Kim; Kwang Suk Park; June-Key Chung; Myung Chul Lee
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 10.057

5.  Myocardial blood flow at rest and stress measured with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: comparison of a distributed parameter model with a Fermi function model.

Authors:  David A Broadbent; John D Biglands; Abdulghani Larghat; Steven P Sourbron; Aleksandra Radjenovic; John P Greenwood; Sven Plein; David L Buckley
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 4.668

6.  Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation.

Authors:  Pim A L Tonino; William F Fearon; Bernard De Bruyne; Keith G Oldroyd; Massoud A Leesar; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A Maccarthy; Marcel Van't Veer; Nico H J Pijls
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-22       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion in the detection of significant coronary artery disease: cutoff values and diagnostic accuracy of quantitative [(15)O]H2O PET imaging.

Authors:  Ibrahim Danad; Valtteri Uusitalo; Tanja Kero; Antti Saraste; Pieter G Raijmakers; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Martijn W Heymans; Sami A Kajander; Mikko Pietilä; Stefan James; Jens Sörensen; Paul Knaapen; Juhani Knuuti
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2014-10-07       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Myocardial perfusion quantitation with 15O-labelled water PET: high reproducibility of the new cardiac analysis software (Carimas).

Authors:  Sergey V Nesterov; Chunlei Han; Maija Mäki; Sami Kajander; Alexandru G Naum; Hans Helenius; Irina Lisinen; Heikki Ukkonen; Mikko Pietilä; Esa Joutsiniemi; Juhani Knuuti
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2009-04-30       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Quantification of absolute myocardial perfusion in patients with coronary artery disease: comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography.

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

10.  Voxel-wise quantification of myocardial blood flow with cardiovascular magnetic resonance: effect of variations in methodology and validation with positron emission tomography.

Authors:  Christopher A Miller; Josephine H Naish; Mark P Ainslie; Christine Tonge; Deborah Tout; Parthiban Arumugam; Anita Banerji; Robin M Egdell; David Clark; Peter Weale; Christopher D Steadman; Gerry P McCann; Simon G Ray; Geoffrey J M Parker; Matthias Schmitt
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 5.364

View more
  2 in total

1.  Application of Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Evaluate Angiogenic Response and Vascular Permeability.

Authors:  Mary C Wallingford; Tomo Tarui; Nirmala Jayaraman; Gordon S Huggins; Manjiri K Dighe
Journal:  Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 10.514

2.  Unsupervised Image Registration towards Enhancing Performance and Explainability in Cardiac and Brain Image Analysis.

Authors:  Chengjia Wang; Guang Yang; Giorgos Papanastasiou
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-09       Impact factor: 3.576

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.