Comparison of dual to single contrast bolus magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of significant coronary artery disease

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 88-93

  Groothuis, Jan G J ^a,b,c   Kremers, Frans P P J ^a   Beek, Aernout M ^a,b   Brinckman, Stijn L ^a,b   Tuinenburg, Alvin C ^a   Jerosch Herold, Michael ^d   Van Rossum, Albert C ^a,b   Hofman, Mark B M ^a,b  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c ROYAL NETHERLANDS ACADEMY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

^d BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Absolute quantification; Coronary artery disease; Diagnostic value; Dual bolus; Magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STRESS RADIOGRAPHY; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC USE; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REPRODUCIBILITY;

AREA UNDER CURVE; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROC CURVE;

EID: 77954103032     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.22231     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. 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. (Pubitemid 28063691)
2. Jerosch-Herold M, Swingen C, Seethamraju RT. Myocardial blood flow quantification with MRI by model-independent deconvolution. Med Phys 2002;29:886-897. (Pubitemid 34525918)
3. 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. (Pubitemid 27337482)
4. Kostler H, Ritter C, Lipp M, Beer M, Hahn D, Sandstede J. Comparison of different contrast agents and doses for quantitative MR myocardial perfusion imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 28:382-389.
5. 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.
6. Christian TF, Aletras AH, Arai AE. Estimation of absolute myocardial blood flow during first-pass MR perfusion imaging using a dual-bolus injection technique: comparison to single-bolus injection method. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;27:1271-1277.
7. Kostler H, Ritter C, Lipp M, Beer M, Hahn D, Sandstede J. Prebolus quantitative MR heart perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 2004;52:296-299. (Pubitemid 39025273)
8. Ritter C, Brackertz A, Sandstede J, Beer M, Hahn D, Kostler H. Absolute quantification of myocardial perfusion under adenosine stress. Magn Reson Med 2006;56:844-9.
9. Utz W, Greiser A, Niendorf T, Dietz R, Schulz-Menger J. Single-or dual-bolus approach for the assessment of myocardial perfusion reserve in quantitative MR perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 2008;59:1373-1377.
10. Hsu LY, Rhoads KL, Holly JE, Kellman P, Aletras AH, Arai AE. Quantitative myocardial perfusion analysis with a dual-bolus contrast-enhanced first-pass MRI technique in humans. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;23:315-322.
11. Kurita T, Sakuma H, Onishi K, et al. 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 2009;30: 444-452.
12. 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.
13. Ishida N, Sakuma H, Motoyasu M, et al. Noninfarcted myocardium: correlation between dynamic first-pass contrast-enhanced myocardial MR imaging and quantitative coronary angiography. Radiology 2003;229:209-216.
14. 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. (Pubitemid 32433710)
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.
16. Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL, et al. A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation 1975;51:5-40.
17. Okazawa H, Takahashi M, Hata T, Sugimoto K, Kishibe Y, Tsuji T. Quantitative evaluation of myocardial blood flow and ejection fraction with a single dose of (13)NH(3) and Gated PET. J Nucl Med 2002;43:999-1005.
18. Fritz-Hansen T, Hove JD, Kofoed KF, Kelbaek H, Larsson HB. Quantification of MRI measured myocardial perfusion reserve in healthy humans: a comparison with positron emission tomography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;27:818-24. (Pubitemid 351508097)
19. Chareonthaitawee P, Kaufmann PA, Rimoldi O, Camici PG. Heterogeneity of resting and hyperemic myocardial blood flow in healthy humans. Cardiovasc Res 2001;50:151-161. (Pubitemid 32244395)
20. Utz W, Niendorf T, Wassmuth R, Messroghli D, Dietz R, Schulz- Menger J. Contrast-dose relation in first-pass myocardial MR perfusion imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25:1131-1135. (Pubitemid 46870268)