Search

Background Quantification of absolute myocardial perfusion using positron emission tomography (PET) augments diagnostic performance and aids risk stratification in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Similar to PET, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) allows for quantification of absolute myocardial blood flow (MBF). To date, quantitative CMR perfusion has not been compared with [15O]H2O PET, which is considered to be the gold standard for quantification of MBF. Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare CMR measurements of absolute myocardial perfusion to those obtained using [15O]H2O PET. Methods Fifty-one patients with stable CAD underwent [15O]H2O PET followed by CMR within 7 days. Late gadolinium enhancement was used to rule out presence of scar tissue. CMR perfusion imaging was performed using a single bolus dual sequence technique. Myocardial perfusion was quantified for the three main vascular territories at rest and during vasodilator stress. Results Pooled CMR estimates of absolute MBF correlated well with PET (r=0.79; p Per vessel – CMR vs PET perfusion Conclusions Resting MBF, stress MBF and CFR measurements correlated poorly with [15O]H2O PET. Nevertheless, stress MBF and CFR were concordant between CMR and [15O]H2O PET in 79% and 75% of vascular territories, respectively. Acknowledgement/Funding None

Aims: The accuracy of magnetic resonance angiography in detecting proximal coronary artery stenoses is unclear. We postulated that fast magnetic resonance angiography is capable of (1) imaging proximal coronary arteries, and (2) detecting stenoses of ≤ 50% of their luminal diameter. Methods and results: Thirty-five patients, referred for analysis of angina pectoris, underwent both conventional angiography and magnetic resonance angiography of coronary arteries. A fast k-space segmented gradient-echo technique was used during breath-holds. Two observers, blinded to the results of conventional angiography, independently analysed the magnetic resonance studies for (1) length of visualized segments, and (2) presence of signal voids indicative of stenoses. From 140 proximal arteries, 15 (11%) were excluded because of incomplete imaging or degraded image quality. Mean length of the visualized segments was 9 ± 4 mm for the left main, 62 ± 16 mm for the left anterior descending, 21 ± 9 mm for the left circumflex and 89 ± 32 mm for the right coronary artery. Sensitivity for detecting ≤ 50% luminal diameter stenoses was 0.00 for the left circumflex, 0.53 for the left anterior descending coronary artery, 0.71 for the RCA and 1.00 for the left main artery. Specificity varied from 0.73 for the left anterior descending coronary artery to 0.96 for the left circumflex. Inter-observer agreement was 0.90. Conclusion: Thus, segmented magnetic resonance angiography is capable of non-invasive imaging of proximal coronary anatomy. Its good accuracy in detecting left main coronary artery disease, intermediate accuracy in detecting right coronary artery and left anterior descending coronary artery stenoses, and low accuracy in detecting left circumflex lesions fit within a range of sensitivities and specificities found by others. Further technical advances are necessary to make the technique clinically robust.