CLINICAL RESEARCH: CARDIAC IMAGING
Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Perfusion Imaging Detects Anatomic and Physiologic Coronary Artery Disease as Measured by Coronary Angiography and Fractional Flow Reserve
Marco A. Costa, MD, PhD, FACC*,*,
Steven Shoemaker, MD*,
Hideki Futamatsu, MD, PhD*,
Chris Klassen, MD ,
Dominick J. Angiolillo, MD, PhD, FACC*,
Minh Nguyen, MD,
Alan Siuciak, MS,
Paul Gilmore, MD, FACC*,
Martin M. Zenni, MD, FACC*,
Luis Guzman, MD, FACC*,
Theodore A. Bass, MD, FACC* and
Norbert Wilke, MD, FACC*,
* Division of Cardiology
Division of Radiology, University of Florida Shands Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida.
Manuscript received August 1, 2006;
revised manuscript received February 7, 2007,
accepted April 3, 2007.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Marco A. Costa, Assistant Professor of Medicine, Director of Research and Cardiovascular Imaging Core Laboratories, University of Florida Shands Jacksonville, 655 West 8th Street, ACC Building, Cardiovascular Center, Jacksonville, Florida 32209 (Email: marco.costa{at}jax.ufl.edu).
Objectives: To evaluate the ability of quantitative perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) to assess the hemodynamic significance of coronary artery disease (CAD) compared with well-established anatomic and physiologic techniques.
Background: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is considered by many investigators to be a reliable stenosis-specific method to determine hemodynamically significant CAD. Quantitative perfusion CMR is a promising noninvasive approach to detect CAD but has yet to be validated against FFR.
Methods: This is a prospective study in patients with suspected CAD who underwent coronary angiography, FFR, and CMR assessments. The quantitative myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) was calculated in 720 myocardial sectors (8 sectors/slice). The MPR was calculated from the ratio between stress and rest myocardial flow based on signal intensity time curves using deconvolution analysis. Stress was simulated with adenosine for both FFR and MPR. The MPR assessments were compared to FFR (n = 44 coronary segments) and quantitative coronary angiography (n = 108 segments) in the corresponding coronary territories.
Results: The MPR was 1.54 ± 0.36 in segments with FFR  0.75 (n = 14) and 2.11 ± 0.68 in those with FFR >0.75 (n = 30; p = 0.0054). An MPR cutoff of 2.04 was 92.9% (95% CI 77.9 to 100.0) sensitive and 56.7% (95% CI 32.8 to 80.6) specific in predicting a coronary segment with FFR 0.75. The MPR was 1.54 ± 0.49 in coronary segments with  50% diameter stenosis (DS) (n = 47) and 2.13 ± 0.80 in segments with <50% DS (n = 61; p < 0.001). An MPR cutoff of 2.04 was 85.1% (95% CI 71.1 to 99.2) sensitive and 49.2% (95% CI 33.6 to 64.8) specific in predicting CAD with 50% DS.
Conclusions: Quantitative perfusion CMR is a safe noninvasive test that represents a stenosis-specific alternative to determine the hemodynamic significance of CAD.
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | CAD = coronary artery disease | | CFR = coronary flow reserve | | CI = confidence interval | | CMR = cardiac magnetic resonance | | DS = diameter stenosis | | FFR = fractional flow reserve | | LV = left ventricle/ventricular | | MPR = myocardial perfusion reserve | | QCA = quantitative coronary angiography | | SI = signal intensity |
|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
J. R. Arnold, J. M. Francis, T. D. Karamitsos, C. C. Lim, W. J. van Gaal, L. Testa, P. Bhamra-Ariza, J. B. Selvanayagam, R. Sayeed, S. Westaby, et al.
Myocardial Perfusion Imaging After Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Using Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: A Validation Study
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging,
May 1, 2011;
4(3):
312 - 318.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Morton, A. Schuster, D. Perera, and E. Nagel
Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging to guide complex revascularization in stable coronary artery disease
Eur. Heart J.,
September 2, 2010;
31(18):
2209 - 2215.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. R. Patel, P. F. Antkowiak, K. R. Nandalur, A. M. West, M. Salerno, V. Arora, J. Christopher, F. H. Epstein, and C. M. Kramer
Assessment of Advanced Coronary Artery Disease: Advantages of Quantitative Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Perfusion Analysis
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
August 10, 2010;
56(7):
561 - 569.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Stanton and T. H. Marwick
Assessment of Subendocardial Structure and Function
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img.,
August 1, 2010;
3(8):
867 - 875.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Bucciarelli-Ducci, P. E. F. Daubeney, P. J. Kilner, A. Seale, E. Reyes, R. Wage, and D. J. Pennell
Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in a Child With Ischemic Heart Disease: Potential Advantages Over Nuclear Medicine
Circulation,
July 20, 2010;
122(3):
311 - 315.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. van Werkhoven, M. W. Heijenbrok, J. D. Schuijf, J. W. Jukema, E. E. van der Wall, J. H. M. Schreur, and J. J. Bax
Combined non-invasive anatomical and functional assessment with MSCT and MRI for the detection of significant coronary artery disease in patients with an intermediate pre-test likelihood
Heart,
March 1, 2010;
96(6):
425 - 431.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Yilmaz, A. Athanasiadis, H. Mahrholdt, M. Voehringer, P. Ong, S. Hill, E.-M. Kispert, M. Seebo, and U. Sechtem
Diagnostic value of perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with angina pectoris but normal coronary angiograms assessed by intracoronary acetylcholine testing
Heart,
March 1, 2010;
96(5):
372 - 379.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. G. J. Groothuis, A. M. Beek, S. L. Brinckman, M. R. Meijerink, S. C. Koestner, R. Nijveldt, M. J. W. Gotte, M. B. M. Hofman, C. van Kuijk, and A. C. van Rossum
Low to Intermediate Probability of Coronary Artery Disease: Comparison of Coronary CT Angiography with First-Pass MR Myocardial Perfusion Imaging
Radiology,
February 1, 2010;
254(2):
384 - 392.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Kusakari, C.-Y. Xiao, N. Himes, S. D. Kinsella, M. Takahashi, A. Rosenzweig, and T. Matsui
Myocyte injury along myofibers in left ventricular remodeling after myocardial infarction
Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg,
December 1, 2009;
9(6):
951 - 955.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Watkins, R. McGeoch, J. Lyne, T. Steedman, R. Good, M.-J. McLaughlin, T. Cunningham, V. Bezlyak, I. Ford, H. J. Dargie, et al.
Validation of Magnetic Resonance Myocardial Perfusion Imaging With Fractional Flow Reserve for the Detection of Significant Coronary Heart Disease
Circulation,
December 1, 2009;
120(22):
2207 - 2213.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. C. Lee and N. P. Johnson
Quantification of Absolute Myocardial Blood Flow by Magnetic Resonance Perfusion Imaging
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img.,
June 1, 2009;
2(6):
761 - 770.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Nagel
Taking the Last Hurdles: Magnetic Resonance Myocardial Perfusion Imaging
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img.,
April 1, 2009;
2(4):
434 - 436.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Kurita, H. Sakuma, K. Onishi, M. Ishida, K. Kitagawa, T. Yamanaka, T. Tanigawa, T. Kitamura, K. Takeda, and M. Ito
Regional myocardial perfusion reserve determined using myocardial perfusion magnetic resonance imaging showed a direct correlation with coronary flow velocity reserve by Doppler flow wire
Eur. Heart J.,
February 2, 2009;
30(4):
444 - 452.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. B. Meijboom, C. A.G. Van Mieghem, N. van Pelt, A. Weustink, F. Pugliese, N. R. Mollet, E. Boersma, E. Regar, R. J. van Geuns, P. J. de Jaegere, et al.
Comprehensive Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenoses: Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography Versus Conventional Coronary Angiography and Correlation With Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Angina
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
August 19, 2008;
52(8):
636 - 643.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. N. DeMaria, J. J. Bax, O. Ben-Yehuda, P. Clopton, G. K. Feld, G. S. Ginsburg, B. H. Greenberg, J. D. Knoke, W. Y.W. Lew, J. A.C. Lima, et al.
Highlights of the Year in JACC 2007
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
January 29, 2008;
51(4):
490 - 512.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
