A direct comparison of the sensitivity of CT and MR cardiac perfusion using a myocardial perfusion phantom

Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 117-124

  Otton, James ^a,b   Morton, Geraint ^a   Schuster, Andreas ^c   Bigalke, Boris ^a,d   Marano, Riccardo ^a   Olivotti, Luca ^a   Nagel, Eike ^a   Chiribiri, Amedeo ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cardiac computed tomography; Cardiac CT perfusion; Cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion; Cardiac MRI; Myocardial CT perfusion; Myocardial perfusion imaging; Phantom

Indexed keywords

GADOBUTROL; IOPROMIDE;

ACCELERATION; ARTICLE; CIRCULATION; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST RADIOGRAPHY; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CONTRAST TO NOISE RATIO; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENERGY; HIGH RESOLUTION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PHANTOM; PHOTON; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84876844065     PISSN: 19345925     EISSN: 1876861X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2013.01.016     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Iskander S., Iskandrian A.E. Risk assessment using single-photon emission computed tomographic technetium-99m sestamibi imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998, 32:57-62.
2. Greenwood J.P., Maredia N., Younger J.F., et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography for diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CE-MARC): a prospective trial. Lancet 2012, 379:453-460.
3. Schwitter J., Wacker C.M., Wilke N., et al. MR-IMPACT II: Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Myocardial Perfusion Assessment in Coronary artery disease Trial: perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance vs. single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparative multicentre, multivendor trial. Eur Heart J 2012, 34:775-781.
4. Wagner A., Mahrholdt H., Holly T.A., et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI and routine single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) perfusion imaging for detection of subendocardial myocardial infarcts: an imaging study. Lancet 2003, 361:374-379.
5. Lockie T., Ishida M., Perera D., et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging at 3.0-Tesla to detect hemodynamically significant coronary stenoses as determined by fractional flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011, 57:70-75.
6. Rumberger J.A., Feiring A.J., Lipton M.J., Higgins C.B., Ell S.R., Marcus M.L. Use of ultrafast computed tomography to quantitate regional myocardial perfusion: a preliminary report. J Am Coll Cardiol 1987, 9:59-69.
7. Vavere A.L., Simon G.G., George R.T., et al. Diagnostic performance of combined noninvasive coronary angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging using 320 row detector computed tomography: design and implementation of the CORE320 multicenter, multinational diagnostic study. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2011, 5:370-381.
8. Bastarrika G., Ramos-Duran L., Rosenblum M.A., Kang D.K., Rowe G.W., Schoepf U.J. Adenosine-stress dynamic myocardial CT perfusion imaging: initial clinical experience. Invest Radiol 2010, 45:306-313.
9. Ko S.M., Choi J.W., Song M.G., et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging using adenosine-induced stress dual-energy computed tomography of the heart: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and conventional coronary angiography. Eur Radiol 2011, 21:26-35.
10. Feuchtner G., Goetti R., Plass A., et al. Adenosine stress high-pitch 128-slice dual-source myocardial computed tomography perfusion for imaging of reversible myocardial ischemia: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2011, 4:540-549.
11. 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.
12. Schmitt M., Horstick G., Petersen S.E., 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.
13. Schuster A., Grunwald I., Chiribiri A., et al. An isolated perfused pig heart model for the development, validation and translation of novel cardiovascular magnetic resonance techniques. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2010, 12:53.
14. George R.T., Silva C., Cordeiro M.A., et al. Multidetector computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging during adenosine stress. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006, 48:153-160.
15. Christian T.F., Frankish M.L., Sisemoore J.H., et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging with first-pass computed tomographic imaging: Measurement of coronary flow reserve in an animal model of regional hyperemia. J Nucl Cardiol 2010, 17:625-630.
16. Chiribiri A., Schuster A., Ishida M., et al. Perfusion phantom: an efficient and reproducible method to simulate myocardial first-pass perfusion measurements with cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Magn Reson Med 2012, 69:698-707.
17. Gupta M., Kadakia J., Hacioglu Y., et al. Non-contrast cardiac computed tomography can accurately detect chronic myocardial infarction: validation study. J Nucl Cardiol 2011, 18:96-103.
18. Cheng A.S., Pegg T.J., Karamitsos T.D., et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging at 3-tesla for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparison with 1.5-tesla. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007, 49:2440-2449.
19. Plein S., Ryf S., Schwitter J., Radjenovic A., Boesiger P., Kozerke S. Dynamic contrast-enhanced myocardial perfusion MRI accelerated with k-t sense. Magn Reson Med 2007, 58:777-785.
20. Hussain S.T., Paul M., Plein S., et al. Design and rationale of the MR-INFORM study: stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging to guide the management of patients with stable coronary artery disease. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2012, 14:65.
21. Wang D., Hu X.H., Zhang S.Z., et al. Image quality and dose performance of 80 kV low dose scan protocol in high-pitch spiral coronary CT angiography: feasibility study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2012, 28:415-423.
22. Ho K.T., Chua K.C., Klotz E., Panknin C. Stress and rest dynamic myocardial perfusion imaging by evaluation of complete time-attenuation curves with dual-source CT. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2010, 3:811-820.
23. Rogers I.S., Cury R.C., Blankstein R., et al. Comparison of postprocessing techniques for the detection of perfusion defects by cardiac computed tomography in patients presenting with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2010, 4:258-266.
24. Weinmann H.J., Brasch R.C., Press W.R., Wesbey G.E. Characteristics of gadolinium-DTPA complex: a potential NMR contrast agent. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1984, 142:619-624.
25. Halliburton S., Arbab-Zadeh A., Dey D., et al. State-of-the-art in CT hardware and scan modes for cardiovascular CT. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2012, 6:154-163.
26. Speidel M.A., Bateman C.L., Tao Y., et al. Reduction of image noise in low tube current dynamic CT myocardial perfusion imaging using HYPR processing: A time-attenuation curve analysis. Medical Physics 2013, 40(1):011904.
27. Hautvast G.L., Chiribiri A., Lockie T., Breeuwer M., Nagel E., Plein S. Quantitative analysis of transmural gradients in myocardial perfusion magnetic resonance images. Magn Reson Med 2011, 66:1477-1487.
28. Gramer B.M., Muenzel D., Leber V., et al. Impact of iterative reconstruction on CNR and SNR in dynamic myocardial perfusion imaging in an animal model. Eur Radiol 2012, 22:2654-2661.
29. Jerosch-Herold M., Swingen C., Seethamraju R.T. Myocardial blood flow quantification with MRI by model-independent deconvolution. Med Phys 2002, 29:886-897.
30. Hautvast G., Chiribiri A., Zarinabad N., Schuster A., Breeuwer M., Nagel E. Myocardial blood flow quantification from MRI by deconvolution using an exponential approximation basis. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2012, 59:2060-2067.
31. Morton G., Chiribiri A., Ishida M., et al. Quantification of absolute myocardial perfusion in patients with coronary artery disease: comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012, 60:1546-1555.
32. Bamberg F., Klotz E., Flohr T., et al. Dynamic myocardial stress perfusion imaging using fast dual-source CT with alternating table positions: initial experience. Eur Radiol 2010, 20:1168-1173.