Importance of parametric mapping and deconvolution in analyzing magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion images

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 374-383

  Carme, Sabin ^a   Maï, Wilfried ^a   Mazzadi, Alejandro ^a   Janier, Marc ^a   Revel, Didier ^a   Magnin, Isabelle ^a   Wiart, Marlène ^a   Neyran, Bruno ^a   Canet Soulas, Emmanuelle ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE LYON   (France)

Author keywords

Cardiovascular MR; Deconvolution method; Intravascular contrast agent; Perfusion maps

Indexed keywords

ADENOSINE; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; CARBOXYMETHYLDEXTRAN ETHYLENEDIAMINO 1,4,7,10 TETRAAZACYCLODODECANE 1,4,7,10 TETRAACETATE GADOLINIUM MEGLUMINE; CONTRAST MEDIUM; ESMOLOL; MICROSPHERE; P 717; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; CORONARY ARTERY CIRCUMFLEX BRANCH; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; FIRST PASS EFFECT; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; MEDICAL ASSESSMENT; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL DETECTION; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SWINE; ANIMAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CORONARY BLOOD VESSEL; DISEASE MODEL; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ANIMALS; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORONARY CIRCULATION; CORONARY STENOSIS; CORONARY VESSELS; DISEASE MODELS, ANIMAL; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SWINE;

EID: 33746388471     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000197980.89673.4b     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Fritz-Hansen T, Rostrup E, Ring PB, et al. Quantification of gadolinium-DTPA concentrations for different inversion times using an IR-turbo flash pulse sequence: a study on optimizing multislice perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 1998;16:893-899.
2. Larsson HB, Fritz-Hansen T, Rostrup E, et al. Myocardial perfusion modeling using MRI. Magn Reson Med. 1996;35:716-726.
3. Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10:223-232.
4. Vallee JP, Ivancevic M, Lazeyras F, et al. Use of high flip angle in T1-prepared FAST sequences for myocardial perfusion quantification. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:507-514.
5. Jerosch-Herold M, Seethamraju RT, Swingen CM, et al. Analysis of myocardial perfusion MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;19:758-770.
6. Barkhausen J, Hunold P, Jochims M, et al. Imaging of myocardial perfusion with magnetic resonance. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;19:750-757.
7. Gerber BL, Bluemke DA, Chin BB, et al. Single-vessel coronary artery stenosis: myocardial perfusion imaging with Gadomer-17 first-pass MR imaging in a swine model of comparison with gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology. 2002;225:104-112.
8. Chiu CW, So NM, Lam WW, et al. Combined first-pass perfusion and viability study at MR imaging in patients with non-ST segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes: feasibility study. Radiology. 2003;226:717-722.
9. Wolff SD, Schwitter J, Coulden R, et al. Myocardial first-pass perfusion magnetic resonance imaging: a multicenter dose-ranging study. Circulation. 2004;110:732-737.
10. Canet EP, Janier MF, Revel D. Magnetic resonance perfusion imaging in ischemic heart disease. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10:423-433.
11. Epstein FH, London JF, Peters DC, et al. Multislice first-pass cardiac perfusion MRI: validation in a model of myocardial infarction. Magn Reson Med. 2002;47:482-491.
12. Cullen JH, Horsfield MA, Reek CR, et al. A myocardial perfusion reserve index in humans using first-pass contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:1386-1394.
13. Fenchel M, Kramer U, Helber U, et al. Semiquantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion using magnetic resonance imaging: evaluation of appropriate thresholds and segmentation models. Invest Radiol. 2004;39:572-581.
14. Comte A, Lalande A, Cochet A, et al. Automatic fuzzy classification of the washout curves from magnetic resonance first-pass perfusion imaging after myocardial infarction. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:545-555.
15. Canet EP, Casali C, Desenfant A, et al. Kinetic characterization of CMD-A2-Gd-DOTA as an intravascular contrast agent for myocardial perfusion measurement with MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2000;43:403-409.
16. Neyran B, Janier MF, Casali C, et al. Mapping myocardial perfusion with an intravascular MR contrast agent: Robustness of deconvolution methods at various blood flows. Magn Reson Med. 2002;48:166-179.
17. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, et al. 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. Circulation. 2002;105:539-542.
18. Heymann MA, Payne BD, Hoffman JI, et al. Blood flow measurements with radionuclide-labeled particles. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 1977;20:55-79.
19. Christian TF, Rettmann DW, Aletras AH, et al. Absolute myocardial perfusion in canines measured by using dual-bolus first-pass MR imaging. Radiology. 2004;232:677-684.
20. Klocke FJ, Simonetti OP, Judd RM, et al. Limits of detection of regional differences in vasodilated flow in viable myocardium by first-pass magnetic resonance perfusion imaging. Circulation. 2001;104:2412-2416.
21. Muhling OM, Dickson ME, Zenovich A, et al. Quantitative magnetic resonance first-pass perfusion analysis: inter- and intraobserver agreement. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2001;3:247-256.
22. Panting JR, Gatehouse PD, Yang GZ, et al. Echo-planar magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging: parametric map analysis and comparison with thallium SPECT. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;13:192-200.
23. Kostler H, Ritter C, Lipp M, et al. Prebolus quantitative MR heart perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2004;52:296-299.
24. Ibrahim T, Nekolla SG, Schreiber K, et al. Assessment of coronary flow reserve: comparison between contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:864-870.
25. Larsson HB, Rosenbaum S, Fritz-Hansen T. Quantification of the effect of water exchange in dynamic contrast MRI perfusion measurements in the brain and heart. Magn Reson Med. 2001;46:272-281.
26. Nielsen G, Fritz-Hansen T, Dirks CG, et al. Evaluation of heart perfusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;20:403-410.
27. Jerosch-Herold M, Hu X, Murthy NS, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of myocardial contrast enhancement with MS-325 and its relation to myocardial blood flow and the perfusion reserve. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;18:544-554.
28. Judd RM, Reeder SB, May-Newman K. Effects of water exchange on the measurement of myocardial perfusion using paramagnetic contrast agents. Magn Reson Med. 1999;41:334-342.
29. Wilke N, Jerosch-Herold M, Wang Y, et al. Myocardial perfusion reserve: assessment with multisection, quantitative, first-pass MR imaging. Radiology. 1997;204:373-384.
30. Bjornerud A, Bjerner T, Johansson LO, et al. Assessment of myocardial blood volume and water exchange: Theoretical considerations and in vivo results. Magn Reson Med. 2003;49:828-837.
31. Schmitt M, Horstick G, Petersen SE, et al. Quantification of resting myocardial blood flow in a pig model of acute ischemia based on first-pass MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2005;53:1223-1227.
32. Schwitter J, Nanz D, Kneifel S, et al. Assessment of myocardial perfusion in coronary artery disease by magnetic resonance: a comparison with positron emission tomography and coronary angiography. Circulation. 2001;103:2230-2235.
33. Fenchel M, Helber U, Simonetti OP, et al. Multislice first-pass myocardial perfusion imaging: comparison of saturation recovery (SR)-True-FISP-two-dimensional (2D) and SR-TurboFLASH-2D pulse sequences. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;19:555-563.
34. Elkington AG, Gatehouse PD, Cannell TM, et al. Comparison of hybrid echo-planar imaging and FLASH myocardial perfusion cardiovascular MR imaging. Radiology. 2005;235:237-243.
35. Gatehouse PD, Elkington AG, Ablitt NA, et al. Accurate assessment of the arterial input function during high-dose myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;20:39-45.
36. Schmitt M, Viallon M, Thelen M, et al. Quantification of myocardial blood flow and blood flow reserve in the presence of arterial dispersion: a simulation study. Magn Reson Med. 2002;47:787-793.
37. Jerosch-Herold M, Wilke N, Stillman AE. Magnetic resonance quantification of the myocardial perfusion reserve with a Fermi function model for constrained deconvolution. Med Phys. 1998;25:73-84.
38. Dornier C, Ivancevic MK, Thevenaz P, et al. Improvement in the quantification of myocardial perfusion using an automatic spline-based registration algorithm. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;18:160-168.
39. Delzescaux T, Frouin F, de Cesare A, et al. Using an adaptive semiautomated self-evaluated registration technique to analyze MRI data for myocardial perfusion assessment. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;18:681-690.