- Walking poster presentation
- Open Access
Combined high-resolution assessment of quantitative perfusion and late enhancement. Towards accurate estimation of the ischaemic burden in patients with coronary artery disease
© Villa et al. 2016
- Published: 27 January 2016
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance
- Late Gadolinium Enhancement
- Myocardial Blood Flow
- Adenosine Stress
- Late Enhancement
Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) allows the combined evaluation of myocardial perfusion status and viability in the same examination. Novel methods for high-resolution quantiative analysis of myocardial perfusion have rencently been described. High-resolution perfusion avoids spatial averaging and potentially enables a more accurate assessment of total inducible ischaemic burden. The simultaneous analysis of high-resolution late gadolinium enhancement images (LGE) allows excluding areas with overt ischaemic scar from quantitative perfusion analysis. This is potentially relevant to the estimation of the ischaemic burden, since areas of scar have can result in false-positive perfusion findings. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of combined high-resolution assessment of perfusion and late enhancement, and to assess the potential of this novel approach to provide a more accurate estimation of the ischaemic burden in patients with coronary artery disease.
20 patients with known CAD and previous myocardial infarct referred for stress perfusion CMR due to new onset of angina were included. All patients underwent rest and adenosine stress first-pass perfusion at 3T (Philips Achieva) using a high-resolution kt turbo field echo sequence and a dual bolus approach (0.075 mmol of Gd/kg of body weight; Gadovist). LGE images were acquired 15 minutes after the rest injection of Gd. Quantiative perfusion analysis was performed using validated high-resolution deconvolution analysis. LGE analysis was performed using conventional semi-quantitative analysis (signal threshold of 5 standard deviations). Stress and rest myocardial blood flow (MBF), myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) and total LV ischaemic burden (MPR threshold of 1.5) were calculated with an without accounting for the presence of LGE and results compared.
All patients had LGE (scarred area 12.5 ± 5.7%). Before considering LGE, average stress MBF, rest MBF and MPR were 2.39 ± 0.94, 0.94 ± 0.42 and 2.83 ± 2.24, respectively. In areas of viable myocardium (LGE-), stress MBF, rest MBF and MPR were 2.82 ± 0.69,1.01 ± 0.26 (p = 0.01) and 3.25 ± 0.58, respectively. In areas of scar (LGE+), stress MBF, rest MBF and MPR were 1.02 ± 0.57,0.99 ± 0.74(p = ns) and 1.04 ± 0.63 (p = 0.001 vs LGE-), respectively. The overall ischaemic burden (at a MPR threshold of 1.5) was 21.3 ± 12.5%. When excluding areas with LGE, the ischaemic burden was 13.4 ± 6.7%(p = 0.001).
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.