Dobutamine stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 3 Tesla

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2008, Pages

  Kelle, S ^a,b   Hamdan, A ^a   Schnackenburg, B ^c   Kohler U ^a   Klein, C ^a   Nagel, E ^d   Fleck, E ^a  

^a DEUTSCHES HERZZENTRUM BERLIN   (Germany)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c PHILIPS HEALTHCARE   (United States)

^d KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATROPINE; DOBUTAMINE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; NITRATE; CARDIOTONIC AGENT; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; MUSCARINIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ANGINA PECTORIS; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; BREATH HOLDING; CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM EXAMINATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DRUG DOSE INCREASE; EVALUATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HEART; HEART MUSCLE ISCHEMIA; HEART RATE; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; MALE; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; PARAMETER; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RATING SCALE; REST; STANDARD; STRESS; THORAX PAIN; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; EXERCISE TEST; HEART MUSCLE; HOSPITALIZATION; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

AGED; ATROPINE; CARDIOTONIC AGENTS; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY CIRCULATION; CORONARY STENOSIS; DOBUTAMINE; EXERCISE TEST; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, CINE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MUSCARINIC ANTAGONISTS; MYOCARDIUM; OBSERVER VARIATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 58749093021     PISSN: 10976647     EISSN: 1532429X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1532-429X-10-44     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Mandapaka S, Hundley WG: Dobutamine cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a review. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006, 24:499-512. (Pubitemid 44320551)
2. Nandalur KR, Dwamena BA, Choudhri AF, Nandalur MR, Carlos RC: Diagnostic performance of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 50:1343-1353. (Pubitemid 47449733)
3. Hundley WG, Hamilton CA, Thomas MS, et al.: Utility of fast cine magnetic resonance imaging and display for the detection of myocardial ischemia in patients not well suited for second harmonic stress echocardiography. Circulation 1999, 100:1697-1702.
4. Nagel E, Lehmkuhl HB, Bocksch W, et al.: Noninvasive diagnosis of ischemia-induced wall motion abnormalities with the use of high-dose dobutamine stress MRI: comparison with dobutamine stress echocardiography. Circulation 1999, 99:763-770. (Pubitemid 29083016)
5. Pennell DJ, Underwood SR, Manzara CC, et al.: Magnetic resonance imaging during dobutamine stress in coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1992, 70:34-40.
6. Plein S, Bloomer TN, Ridgway JP, Jones TR, Bainbridge GJ, Sivananthan MU: Steady-state free precession magnetic resonance imaging of the heart: comparison with segmented k-space gradient-echo imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001, 14:230-236. (Pubitemid 32801056)
7. Paetsch I, Jahnke C, Wahl A, et al.: Comparison of dobutamine stress magnetic resonance, adenosine stress magnetic resonance, and adenosine stress magnetic resonance perfusion. Circulation 2004, 110:835-842. (Pubitemid 39096012)
8. Paetsch I, Jahnke C, Ferrari VA, et al.: Determination of interobserver variability for identifying inducible left ventricular wall motion abnormalities during dobutamine stress magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Heart J 2006, 27:1459-1464. (Pubitemid 43998080)
9. Barkhausen J, Ruehm SG, Goyen M, Buck T, Laub G, Debatin JF: MR evaluation of ventricular function: true fast imaging with steady-state precession versus fast low-angle shot cine MR imaging: feasibility study. Radiology 2001, 219:264-269. (Pubitemid 32234085)
10. Hamdan A, Kelle S, Schnackenburg B, Fleck E, Nagel E: quantitative assessment of left ventricular volumes using TGrE approach after application of extracellular contrast agent at 3 Tesla. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2007, 9:845-853. (Pubitemid 350232923)
11. Pennell DJ, Sechtem UP, Higgins CB, et al.: Clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR): Consensus Panel report. Eur Heart J 2004, 25:1940-1965. (Pubitemid 39452612)
12. Nagel E, Kelle S, Fleck E: [Indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging]. Med Klin (Munich) 2005, 100:219-225. (Pubitemid 40576930)
13. Fischer SE, Wickline SA, Lorenz CH: Novel real-time R-wave detection algorithm based on the vectorcardiogram for accurate gated magnetic resonance acquisitions. Magn Reson Med 1999, 42:361-370.
14. Nagel E, Lorenz C, Baer F, et al.: Stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance: consensus panel report. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2001, 3:267-281. (Pubitemid 33062631)
15. 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. (Pubitemid 34262671)
16. Araoz PA, Glockner JF, McGee KP, et al.: 3 Tesla MR imaging provides improved contrast in first-pass myocardial perfusion imaging over a range of gadolinium doses. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2005, 7:559-564.
17. Gebker R, Jahnke C, Paetsch I, et al.: Diagnostic Performance of Myocardial Perfusion MR at 3 T in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease. Radiology 2008, 247:57-63.
18. Klumpp B, Fenchel M, Hoevelborn T, et al.: Assessment of myocardial viability using delayed enhancement magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla. Invest Radiol 2006, 41:661-667. (Pubitemid 44213742)
19. Leiner T, de Vries M, Hoogeveen R, Vasbinder GB, Lemaire E, van Engelshoven JM: Contrast-enhanced peripheral MR angiography at 3 Tesla: initial experience with a whole-body scanner in healthy volunteers. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003, 17:609-614. (Pubitemid 36528678)
20. Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J, Requardt M, Weinmann HJ: Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol 2005, 40:715-724. (Pubitemid 41546838)
21. Stuber M, Botnar RM, Fischer SE, et al.: Preliminary report on in vivo coronary MRA at 3 Tesla in humans. Magn Reson Med 2002, 48:425-429. (Pubitemid 34951319)
22. Pedersen M: Safety update on the possible causal relationship between gadolinium-containing MRI agents and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 2007, 25:881-883. (Pubitemid 46697557)
23. Roes SD, Kelle S, Kaandorp TA, et al.: Comparison of myocardial infarct size assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and left ventricular function and volumes to predict mortality in patients with healed myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2007, 100:930-936. (Pubitemid 47368098)
24. Kwong RY, Sattar H, Wu H, et al.: Incidence and prognostic implication of unrecognized myocardial scar characterized by cardiac magnetic resonance in diabetic patients without clinical evidence of myocardial infarction. Circulation 2008, 118:1011-1020.
25. Kelle S, Kokocinski T, Thouet T, Fleck E, Nagel E: 1.5 vs. 3 Tesla - reduction of contrast agent dosage for scar-imaging possible? European Heart Journal 2006, 27:422-423.
26. Stuber M, Weiss RG: Coronary magnetic resonance angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007, 26:219-234. (Pubitemid 47257719)
27. Wahl A, Paetsch I, Gollesch A, et al.: Safety and feasibility of highdose dobutamine-atropine stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance for diagnosis of myocardial ischaemia: experience in 1000 consecutive cases. Eur Heart J 2004, 25:1230-1236. (Pubitemid 38891573)