Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2006 Jun;27(12):1465-71.
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl039. Epub 2006 May 23.

Cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease: a comparison with coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease: a comparison with coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve

Johannes Rieber et al. Eur Heart J. 2006 Jun.

Abstract

Aims: Cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging (CMRI) is a promising technique for non-invasive measurement of myocardial perfusion reserve. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an established invasive method for functional assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD). To prospectively assess the diagnostic value of CMRI for the detection of haemodynamically significant coronary lesions, compared with coronary angiography (CA) and FFR.

Methods and results: Forty-three patients with suspected or known CAD underwent CA, CMRI, and FFR measurement. First pass magnetic resonance perfusion examination was performed during hyperaemia (140 microg/kg/min adenosine over 6 min) and at rest. One hundred and twenty-nine perfusion territories were assessed by semi-quantitative evaluation of signal intensity-time curves using the myocardial perfusion reserve index (MPRI) [upslope(stress(corrected))/upslope(rest(corrected))]. Perfusion territories were categorized as normal (coronary stenosis < or = 50%), intermediate (stenosis > 50% and FFR > 0.75), or severe (stenosis > 50% and FFR < or = 0.75 or total occlusion). MPRI values (+/-SD) were significantly different between the three categories [normal, 2.2 +/- 0.5 vs. intermediate, 1.8 +/- 0.5 (P = 0.005) and intermediate vs. severe, 1.2 +/- 0.3 (P < 0.001)]. An MPRI cut-off value of 1.5 (derived from receiver operating characteristics analysis) distinguished haemodynamically relevant (severe) from non-relevant (normal and intermediate) stenoses with a sensitivity of 88% (CI 74-100%) and a specificity of 90% (CI 84-96%).

Conclusion: In contrast to earlier studies that compared CMRI with morphological examination (CA) alone, the present study compared CMRI with CA plus a standard invasive functional assessment (FFR) and demonstrated that CMRI is able to distinguish haemodynamically relevant from non-relevant coronary lesions with a high sensitivity and specificity and may therefore contribute to clinical decision-making.

PubMed Disclaimer