Myocardial perfusion: Near-automated evaluation from contrast-enhanced MR images obtained at rest and during vasodilator stress

Radiology

Volumn 265, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 576-583

  Tarroni, Giacomo ^a,b   Corsi, Cristiana ^a   Antkowiak, Patrick F ^c   Veronesi, Federico ^a,d   Kramer, Christopher M ^c   Epstein, Frederick H ^c   Walter, James ^b   Lamberti, Claudio ^a   Lang, Roberto M ^b   Mor Avi, Victor ^b   Patel, Amit R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADENOSINE; REGADENOSON;

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HEART PERFUSION; HEART STRESS; HUMAN; HYPEREMIA; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOCARDIOGRAPHY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REST; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; VALIDATION STUDY; VASODILATATION;

ALGORITHMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; EXERCISE TEST; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; HYPEREMIA; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; REST; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VASODILATOR AGENTS;

EID: 84867904869     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12112475     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Klem I, Heitner JF, Shah DJ, et al. Improved detection of coronary artery disease by stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance with the use of delayed enhancement infarction imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47(8):1630-1638.
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(14):1343- 1353.
3. Schwitter J, Wacker CM, van Rossum AC, et al. MR-IMPACT: comparison of perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance with single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease in a multicentre, multivendor, randomized trial. Eur Heart J 2008;29(4):480-489.
4. Greenwood JP, Maredia N, Younger JF, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography for diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CE-MARC): a prospective trial. Lancet 2012;379(9814):453-460.
5. 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(1):73-84.
6. Al-Saadi N, Nagel E, Gross M, et al. Improvement of myocardial perfusion reserve early after coronary intervention: assessment with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36(5): 1557-1564.
7. Rieber J, Huber A, Erhard I, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease: a comparison with coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J 2006;27(12):1465-1471.
8. 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(4):818-824.
9. Patel AR, Antkowiak PF, Nandalur KR, et al. Assessment of advanced coronary artery disease: advantages of quantitative cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56(7):561-569.
10. Pack NA, DiBella EV. Comparison of myocardial perfusion estimates from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging with four quantitative analysis methods. Magn Reson Med 2010;64(1):125-137.
11. McCommis KS, Goldstein TA, Abendschein DR, et al. Quantification of regional myocardial oxygenation by magnetic resonance imaging: validation with positron emission tomography. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;3(1):41-46.
12. Karamitsos TD, Leccisotti L, Arnold JR, et al. Relationship between regional myocardial oxygenation and perfusion in patients with coronary artery disease: insights from cardiovascular magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2010;3(1):32-40.
13. Adluru G, DiBella EV, Schabel MC. Model- based registration for dynamic cardiac perfusion MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24(5):1062-1070.
14. Gupta V, Hendriks EA, Milles J, et al. Fully automatic registration and segmentation of first-pass myocardial perfusion MR image sequences. Acad Radiol 2010;17(11): 1375-1385.
15. Weng AM, Ritter CO, Lotz J, Beer MJ, Hahn D, Köstler H. Automatic postprocessing for the assessment of quantitative human myocardial perfusion using MRI. Eur Radiol 2010;20(6):1356-1365.
16. Corsi C, Veronesi F, Lamberti C, et al. Automated frame-by-frame endocardial border detection from cardiac magnetic resonance images for quantitative assessment of left ventricular function: validation and clinical feasibility. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;29(3):560-568.
17. Ding S, Wolff SD, Epstein FH. Improved coverage in dynamic contrast-enhanced cardiac MRI using interleaved gradientecho EPI. Magn Reson Med 1998;39(4): 514-519.
18. Kellman P, Epstein FH, McVeigh ER. Adaptive sensitivity encoding incorporating temporal filtering (TSENSE). Magn Reson Med 2001;45(5):846-852.
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(3):677-684.
20. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1(8476):307-310.
21. Dornier C, Ivancevic MK, Thévenaz P, Vallée JP. Improvement in the quantification of myocardial perfusion using an automatic spline-based registration algorithm. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003;18(2):160-168.
22. Milles J, van der Geest RJ, Jerosch-Herold M, Reiber JH, Lelieveldt BP. Fully automated motion correction in first-pass myocardial perfusion MR image sequences. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2008;27(11):1611-1621.
23. Wollny G, Ledesma-Carbayo MJ, Kellman P, Santos A. Exploiting quasiperiodicity in motion correction of free-breathing myocardial perfusion MRI. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010;29(8):1516-1527.
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(5):864-870.
25. Nagel E, Klein C, Paetsch I, et al. Magnetic resonance perfusion measurements for the noninvasive detection of coronary artery disease. Circulation 2003;108(4):432-437.
26. Uren NG, Melin JA, De Bruyne B, Wijns W, Baudhuin T, Camici PG. Relation between myocardial blood flow and the severity of coronary-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 1994;330(25):1782-1788.
27. Bateman TM, Heller GV, McGhie AI, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of rest/stress ECGgated Rb-82 myocardial perfusion PET: comparison with ECG-gated Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13(1): 24-33.
28. Mumford D, Shah J. Optimal approximation by piecewise smooth functions and associated variational problems. Pure Appl Math 1989;42(5):577-585.
29. Malladi R, Sethian JA. Image processing via level set curvature flow. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1995;92(15):7046-7050.
30. Sethian JA. Level set methods and fast marching methods. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1999.