» Articles » PMID: 30003181

Multimodality Quantitative Assessments of Myocardial Perfusion Using Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance and O-labelled Water Positron Emission Tomography Imaging

Overview
Publisher IEEE
Date 2018 Jul 14
PMID 30003181
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Kinetic modelling of myocardial perfusion imaging data allows the absolute quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) and can improve the diagnosis and clinical assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD). Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is considered the reference standard technique for absolute quantification, whilst oxygen-15 (O)-water has been extensively implemented for MBF quantification. Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) has also been used for MBF quantification and showed comparable diagnostic performance against (O)-water PET studies. We investigated for the first time the diagnostic performance of two different PET MBF analysis softwares PMOD and Carimas, for obstructive CAD detection against invasive clinical standard methods in 20 patients with known or suspected CAD. Fermi and distributed parameter modelling-derived MBF quantification from DCE-MRI was also compared against (O)-water PET, in a subgroup of 6 patients. The sensitivity and specificity for PMOD was significantly superior for obstructive CAD detection in both per vessel (0.83, 0.90) and per patient (0.86, 0.75) analysis, against Carimas (0.75, 0.65), (0.81, 0.70), respectively. We showed strong, significant correlations between MR and PET MBF quantifications (r=0.83-0.92). However, DP and PMOD analysis demonstrated comparable and higher haemodynamic differences between obstructive versus (no, minor or non)-obstructive CAD, against Fermi and Carimas analysis. Our MR method assessments against the optimum PET reference standard technique for perfusion analysis showed promising results in per segment level and can support further multi-modality assessments in larger patient cohorts. Further MR against PET assessments may help to determine their comparative diagnostic performance for obstructive CAD detection.

Citing Articles

Compartmental modeling for blood flow quantification from dynamic O-water PET images of humans: a systematic review.

Rainio O, Klen R Ann Nucl Med. 2025; 39(3):231-246.

PMID: 39832118 PMC: 11829939. DOI: 10.1007/s12149-025-02014-x.


Unsupervised Image Registration towards Enhancing Performance and Explainability in Cardiac and Brain Image Analysis.

Wang C, Yang G, Papanastasiou G Sensors (Basel). 2022; 22(6).

PMID: 35336295 PMC: 8951078. DOI: 10.3390/s22062125.


Application of Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Evaluate Angiogenic Response and Vascular Permeability.

Wallingford M, Tarui T, Jayaraman N, Huggins G, Dighe M Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2019; 39(8):1507-1509.

PMID: 31339781 PMC: 8162837. DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.119.312972.

References
1.
Danad I, Uusitalo V, Kero T, Saraste A, Raijmakers P, Lammertsma A . Quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion in the detection of significant coronary artery disease: cutoff values and diagnostic accuracy of quantitative [(15)O]H2O PET imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(14):1464-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.05.069. View

2.
Morton G, Chiribiri A, Ishida M, Hussain S, Schuster A, Indermuehle A . 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(16):1546-55. PMC: 7611225. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.05.052. View

3.
Nesterov S, Han C, Maki M, Kajander S, Naum A, Helenius H . Myocardial perfusion quantitation with 15O-labelled water PET: high reproducibility of the new cardiac analysis software (Carimas). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009; 36(10):1594-602. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-009-1143-8. View

4.
Tonino P, Fearon W, De Bruyne B, Oldroyd K, Leesar M, Ver Lee P . Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010; 55(25):2816-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.096. View

5.
Broadbent D, Biglands J, Larghat A, Sourbron S, Radjenovic A, Greenwood J . Myocardial blood flow at rest and stress measured with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: comparison of a distributed parameter model with a Fermi function model. Magn Reson Med. 2013; 70(6):1591-7. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.24611. View