A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä

Diagnostic Performance of Quantitative Perfusion Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Prior Coronary Artery Disease




TekijätHoek, R; Borodzicz-Jazdzyk, S; van Diemen, PA; Somsen, YBO; de Winter, RW; Jukema, RA; Twisk, JWR; Raijmakers, PG; Knuuti, J, Maaniitty, T; Underwood, SR; Nagel, E; Robbers, LFHJ; Demirkiran, A; von Bartheld, MB; Driessen, RS; Danad, I; Götte, MJW; Knaapen, P

KustantajaOxford University Press

Julkaisuvuosi2024

JournalEHJ Cardiovascular Imaging / European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging

Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimiEuropean heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging

Lehden akronyymiEur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging

Artikkelin numerojeae262

Vuosikerta26

Numero2

Aloitussivu207

Lopetussivu217

ISSN2047-2404

eISSN2047-2412

DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeae262

Verkko-osoitehttps://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeae262

Rinnakkaistallenteen osoitehttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/458972721


Tiivistelmä

Aims: The diagnostic performance of quantitative perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (QP-CMR) imaging has scarcely been evaluated in patients with a history of coronary artery disease (CAD) and new onset chest pain. The present study compared the diagnostic performance of automated QP-CMR for detection of fractional flow reserve (FFR) defined hemodynamically significant CAD with visual assessment of first-pass stress perfusion CMR (v-CMR) and quantitative [15O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in a true head-to-head fashion in patients with prior CAD.

Methods and results: This PACIFIC-2 substudy included 145 symptomatic chronic coronary symptom patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). All patients underwent dual-sequence, single bolus perfusion CMR and [15O]H2O PET perfusion imaging followed by invasive coronary angiography with three-vessel FFR. Hemodynamically significant CAD was defined as an FFR ≤0.80. QP-CMR, v-CMR and PET exhibited a sensitivity of 66%, 67%, and 80%, respectively, whereas specificity was 60%, 62%, and 63%. Sensitivity of QP-CMR was lower than PET (P=0.015), whereas specificity of QP-CMR and PET was comparable. Diagnostic accuracy and area under the curve (AUC) of QP-CMR (64% and 0.66) was comparable to both v-CMR (66% [P=NS] and 0.67 (P=NS]) and PET (74% [P=NS] and 0.78 [P=NS]).

Conclusions: In patients with prior MI and/or PCI, the diagnostic performance of QP-CMR was comparable to visual assessment of first-pass stress perfusion CMR and quantitative [15O]H2O PET for the detection of hemodynamically significant CAD as defined by FFR.


Ladattava julkaisu

This is an electronic reprint of the original article.
This reprint may differ from the original in pagination and typographic detail. Please cite the original version.




Julkaisussa olevat rahoitustiedot
None declared.


Last updated on 2025-24-02 at 14:05