PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to further develop and combine several innovative sequence designs to achieve quantitative 3D myocardial perfusion. These developments include an optimized 3D stack-of-stars readout (150 ms per beat), efficient acquisition of a 2D arterial input function, tailored saturation pulse design, and potential whole heart coverage during quantitative stress perfusion. THEORY AND METHODS: All studies were performed free-breathing on a Prisma 3T MRI scanner. Phantom validation was used to verify sequence accuracy. A total of 21 subjects (3 patients with known disease) were scanned, 12 with a rest only protocol and 9 with both stress (regadenoson) and rest protocols. First pass quantitative perfusion was performed with gadoteridol (0.075 mmol/kg). RESULTS: Implementation and quantitative perfusion results are shown for healthy subjects and subjects with known coronary disease. Average rest perfusion for the 15 included healthy subjects was 0.79 ± 0.19 mL/g/min, the average stress perfusion for 6 healthy subject studies was 2.44 ± 0.61 mL/g/min, and the average global myocardial perfusion reserve ratio for 6 healthy subjects was 3.10 ± 0.24. Perfusion deficits for 3 patients with ischemia are shown. Average resting heart rate was 59 ± 7 bpm and the average stress heart rate was 81 ± 10 bpm. CONCLUSION: This work demonstrates that a quantitative 3D myocardial perfusion sequence with the acquisition of a 2D arterial input function is feasible at high stress heart rates such as during stress. T1 values and gadolinium concentrations of the sequence match the reference standard well in a phantom, and myocardial rest and stress perfusion and myocardial perfusion reserve values are consistent with those published in literature.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to further develop and combine several innovative sequence designs to achieve quantitative 3D myocardial perfusion. These developments include an optimized 3D stack-of-stars readout (150 ms per beat), efficient acquisition of a 2D arterial input function, tailored saturation pulse design, and potential whole heart coverage during quantitative stress perfusion. THEORY AND METHODS: All studies were performed free-breathing on a Prisma 3T MRI scanner. Phantom validation was used to verify sequence accuracy. A total of 21 subjects (3 patients with known disease) were scanned, 12 with a rest only protocol and 9 with both stress (regadenoson) and rest protocols. First pass quantitative perfusion was performed with gadoteridol (0.075 mmol/kg). RESULTS: Implementation and quantitative perfusion results are shown for healthy subjects and subjects with known coronary disease. Average rest perfusion for the 15 included healthy subjects was 0.79 ± 0.19 mL/g/min, the average stress perfusion for 6 healthy subject studies was 2.44 ± 0.61 mL/g/min, and the average global myocardial perfusion reserve ratio for 6 healthy subjects was 3.10 ± 0.24. Perfusion deficits for 3 patients with ischemia are shown. Average resting heart rate was 59 ± 7 bpm and the average stress heart rate was 81 ± 10 bpm. CONCLUSION: This work demonstrates that a quantitative 3D myocardial perfusion sequence with the acquisition of a 2D arterial input function is feasible at high stress heart rates such as during stress. T1 values and gadolinium concentrations of the sequence match the reference standard well in a phantom, and myocardial rest and stress perfusion and myocardial perfusion reserve values are consistent with those published in literature.
Authors: Robert Manka; Lukas Wissmann; Rolf Gebker; Roy Jogiya; Manish Motwani; Michael Frick; Sebastian Reinartz; Bernhard Schnackenburg; Markus Niemann; Alexander Gotschy; Christiane Kuhl; Eike Nagel; Eckart Fleck; Nikolaus Marx; Thomas F Luescher; Sven Plein; Sebastian Kozerke Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Taehoon Shin; Krishna S Nayak; Juan M Santos; Dwight G Nishimura; Bob S Hu; Michael V McConnell Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ganesh Adluru; Chris McGann; Peter Speier; Eugene G Kholmovski; Akram Shaaban; Edward V R Dibella Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Kelvin Chow; Peter Kellman; Bruce S Spottiswoode; Sonia Nielles-Vallespin; Andrew E Arai; Michael Salerno; Richard B Thompson Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2015-10-01 Impact factor: 5.364
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
Authors: Lexiaozi Fan; Bradley D Allen; Austin E Culver; Li-Yueh Hsu; Kyungpyo Hong; Brandon C Benefield; James C Carr; Daniel C Lee; Daniel Kim Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-03-24 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Joao Tourais; Cian M Scannell; Torben Schneider; Ebraham Alskaf; Richard Crawley; Filippo Bosio; Javier Sanchez-Gonzalez; Mariya Doneva; Christophe Schülke; Jakob Meineke; Jochen Keupp; Jouke Smink; Marcel Breeuwer; Amedeo Chiribiri; Markus Henningsson; Teresa Correia Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-04-29
Authors: Lexiaozi Fan; Kyungpyo Hong; Li-Yueh Hsu; James C Carr; Bradley D Allen; Daniel C Lee; Daniel Kim Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-04-04 Impact factor: 3.737