Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Semi-Quantitative Versus Visual Analysis of Adenosine Perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Intermediate-Grade Coronary Artery Stenosis Using Fractional Flow Reserve as the Reference: A Pilot Study Cover

Semi-Quantitative Versus Visual Analysis of Adenosine Perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Intermediate-Grade Coronary Artery Stenosis Using Fractional Flow Reserve as the Reference: A Pilot Study

Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology
Volume 106 (2022): Issue 1
By: Olivier Ghekiere,  Jean-Nicolas Dacher,  Willem Dewilde,  Wilfried Cools,  Paul Dendale and  Alain Nchimi  
Open Access
|Jun 2022

References

  1. 1Tu S, Barbato E, Koszegi Z, et al. Fractional flow reserve calculation from 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography and TIMI frame count: A fast computer model to quantify the functional significance of moderately obstructed coronary arteries. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 7(7): 768–77. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.03.004
    Back to article
  2. 2Ghekiere O, Dewilde W, Bellekens M, et al. Diagnostic performance of quantitative coronary computed tomography angiography and quantitative coronary angiography to predict hemodynamic significance of intermediate-grade stenoses. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 31(8): 1651–61. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-015-0748-1
    Back to article
  3. 3Groothuis JG, Beek AM, Brinckman SL, et al. Combined non-invasive functional and anatomical diagnostic work-up in clinical practice: The magnetic resonance and computed tomography in suspected coronary artery disease (MARCC) study. Eur Heart J. 2013; 34(26): 1990–8. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht077
    Back to article
  4. 4Tobis J, Azarbal B, Slavin L. Assessment of intermediate severity coronary lesions in the catheterization laboratory. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 49(8): 839–48. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.10.055
    Back to article
  5. 5Nam CW, Yoon HJ, Cho YK, et al. Outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention in intermediate coronary artery disease: Fractional flow reserve-guided versus intravascular ultrasound-guided. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010; 3(8): 812–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.04.016
    Back to article
  6. 6Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360(3): 213–24. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0807611
    Back to article
  7. 7Zhang D, Lv S, Song X, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis. Heart. 2015; 101(6): 455–62. DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2014-306578
    Back to article
  8. 8Li C, Xu R, Yao K, et al. Functional significance of intermediate coronary stenosis in patients with single-vessel coronary artery disease: A comparison of dynamic SPECT coronary flow reserve with intracoronary pressure-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR). J Nucl Cardiol; 2020. DOI: 10.1007/s12350-020-02293-z
    Back to article
  9. 9Forster S, Rieber J, Ubleis C, et al. Tc-99m sestamibi single photon emission computed tomography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease: A comparison with quantitative coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010; 26(2): 203–13. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-009-9510-x
    Back to article
  10. 10Danad I, Szymonifka J, Twisk JWR, et al. Diagnostic performance of cardiac imaging methods to diagnose ischaemia-causing coronary artery disease when directly compared with fractional flow reserve as a reference standard: A meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2017; 38(13): 991–8. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw095
    Back to article
  11. 11De Bruyne B, Baudhuin T, Melin JA, et al. Coronary flow reserve calculated from pressure measurements in humans. Validation with positron emission tomography. Circulation. 1994; 89(3): 1013–22. DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.89.3.1013
    Back to article
  12. 12van de Hoef TP, Meuwissen M, Escaned J, et al. Fractional flow reserve as a surrogate for inducible myocardial ischaemia. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2013; 10(8): 439–52. DOI: 10.1038/nrcardio.2013.86
    Back to article
  13. 13Ghekiere O, Dacher JN, Dewilde W, et al. Value of Relative Myocardial Perfusion at MRI for Fractional Flow Reserve-Defined Ischemia: A Pilot Study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019; 1–8. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.18.20469
    Back to article
  14. 14Manisty C, Ripley DP, Herrey AS, et al. Splenic Switch-off: A Tool to Assess Stress Adequacy in Adenosine Perfusion Cardiac MR Imaging. Radiology. 2015; 276(3): 732–40. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015142059
    Back to article
  15. 15Lubbers DD, Rijlaarsdam-Hermsen D, Kuijpers D, et al. Performance of adenosine ‘stress-only’ perfusion MRI in patients without a history of myocardial infarction: A clinical outcome study. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012; 28(1): 109–15. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-010-9775-0
    Back to article
  16. 16Bettencourt N, Chiribiri A, Schuster A, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of functionally significant obstructive coronary artery disease: A prospective study. Int J Cardiol. 2013; 168(2): 765–73. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.09.231
    Back to article
  17. 17Watkins S, McGeoch R, Lyne J, et al. Validation of magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging with fractional flow reserve for the detection of significant coronary heart disease. Circulation. 2009; 120(22): 2207–13. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.872358
    Back to article
  18. 18Ebersberger U, Makowski MR, Schoepf UJ, et al. Magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging at 3.0 Tesla for the identification of myocardial ischaemia: Comparison with coronary catheter angiography and fractional flow reserve measurements. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 14(12): 1174–80. DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jet074
    Back to article
  19. 19Gebker R, Frick M, Jahnke C, et al. Value of additional myocardial perfusion imaging during dobutamine stress magnetic resonance for the assessment of intermediate coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012; 28(1): 89–97. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-010-9764-3
    Back to article
  20. 20Jung PH, Rieber J, Stork S, et al. Effect of contrast application on interpretability and diagnostic value of dobutamine stress echocardiography in patients with intermediate coronary lesions: Comparison with myocardial fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J. 2008; 29(20): 2536–43. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn204
    Back to article
  21. 21Rieber J, Jung P, Erhard I, et al. Comparison of pressure measurement, dobutamine contrast stress echocardiography and SPECT for the evaluation of intermediate coronary stenoses. The COMPRESS trial. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent. 2004; 6(3–4): 142–7. DOI: 10.1080/14628840410030504
    Back to article
  22. 22Hacker M, Rieber J, Schmid R, et al. Comparison of Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT with fractional flow reserve in patients with intermediate coronary artery stenoses. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005; 12(6): 645–54. DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclcard.2005.07.006
    Back to article
  23. 23Shehata ML, Basha TA, Hayeri MR, Hartung D, Teytelboym OM, Vogel-Claussen J. MR myocardial perfusion imaging: Insights on techniques, analysis, interpretation, and findings. Radiographics. 2014; 34(6): 1636–57. DOI: 10.1148/rg.346140074
    Back to article
  24. 24Coelho-Filho OR, Rickers C, Kwong RY, Jerosch-Herold M. MR myocardial perfusion imaging. Radiology. 2013; 266(3): 701–15. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12110918
    Back to article
  25. 25Yang J, Dou G, He B, et al. Stress Myocardial Blood Flow Ratio by Dynamic CT Perfusion Identifies Hemodynamically Significant CAD. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020; 13(4): 966–76. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2019.06.016
    Back to article
  26. 26Johnson NP, Toth GG, Lai D, et al. Prognostic value of fractional flow reserve: Linking physiologic severity to clinical outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(16): 1641–54. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.07.973
    Back to article
  27. 27Ghekiere O, Bielen J, Leipsic J, et al. Correlation of FFR-derived from CT and stress perfusion CMR with invasive FFR in intermediate-grade coronary artery stenosis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019; 35(3): 559–68. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-018-1464-4
    Back to article
  28. 28Nagel E, Greenwood JP, McCann GP, et al. Magnetic Resonance Perfusion or Fractional Flow Reserve in Coronary Disease. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380(25): 2418–28. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1716734
    Back to article
  29. 29Maron DJ, Hochman JS, Reynolds HR, et al. Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382(15): 1395–407. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1915922
    Back to article
  30. 30Motwani M, Maredia N, Fairbairn TA, et al. High-resolution versus standard-resolution cardiovascular MR myocardial perfusion imaging for the detection of coronary artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012; 5(3): 306–13. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.111.971796
    Back to article
  31. 31Rieber J, Huber A, Erhard I, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease: A comparison with coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27(12): 1465–71. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl039
    Back to article
  32. 32Motwani M, Kidambi A, Uddin A, Sourbron S, Greenwood JP, Plein S. Quantification of myocardial blood flow with cardiovascular magnetic resonance throughout the cardiac cycle. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2015; 17(1): 4. DOI: 10.1186/s12968-015-0107-3
    Back to article
  33. 33Nchimi A, Mancini I, Broussaud TK. Influence of the cardiac cycle on time-intensity curves using multislice dynamic magnetic resonance perfusion. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014; 30(7): 1347–55. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-014-0466-0
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/jbsr.2675 | Journal eISSN: 2514-8281
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Oct 10, 2021
Accepted on: Jun 8, 2022
Published on: Jun 24, 2022
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
Coronary artery stenosis,
perfusion magnetic resonance imaging,
adenosine,
fractional flow reserve,
semi-quantitative analysis

© 2022 Olivier Ghekiere, Jean-Nicolas Dacher, Willem Dewilde, Wilfried Cools, Paul Dendale, Alain Nchimi, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 106 (2022): Issue 1Next article