Voxel-wise quantification of myocardial blood flow with cardiovascular magnetic resonance: effect of variations in methodology and validation with positron emission tomography

Table 2 Effect of saturation correction and arterial input function location on myocardial blood flow quantification

	Overall MBF (mL/min/g)	Stress MBF (mL/min/g)	Rest MBF (mL/min/g)
A. Saturation correction
Contrast agent concentration	1.10 ± 0.64	1.55 ± 0.63	0.66 ± 0.20
Signal intensity	1.80 ± 1.03	2.51 ± 1.00	1.09 ± 0.33
p value	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
95% limits of agreement	−0.20 to 1.60	0.01 to 1.92	0.02 to 0.85
B. AIF location
Basal ventricular	1.10 ± 0.64	1.55 ± 0.63	0.66 ± 0.20
Mid ventricular	1.22 ± 0.80	1.79 ± 0.75	0.64 ± 0.23
p value	0.002	<0.001	0.392
95% limits of agreement	−0.40 to 0.64	−0.36 to 0.85	−0.23 to 0.21

95% limits of agreement represent mean difference ± 2 standard deviations. For part A, the limits of agreement refer to MBF measured using raw signal intensity curves minus MBF measured using calculated contrast agent concentration curves (to correct for signal saturation); and for part B, MBF measured using a mid-ventricular-positioned AIF minus MBF measured using a basal-ventricular-positioned AIF.

ISSN: 1532-429X