PURPOSE: To compare fully quantitative and semiquantitative analysis of rest and stress myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) using a dual-bolus first-pass perfusion MRI method in humans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Rest and dipyridamole stress perfusion imaging was performed on 10 healthy humans by administering gadolinium contrast using a dual-bolus protocol. Ventricular and myocardial time-signal intensity curves were generated from a series of T1-weighted images and adjusted for surface-coil intensity variations. Corrected signal intensity curves were then fitted using fully quantitative model constrained deconvolution (MCD) to quantify MBF (mL/min/g) and MPR. The results were compared with semiquantitative contrast enhancement ratio (CER) and upslope index (SLP) measurements. RESULTS: MBF (mL/min/g) estimated with MCD averaged 1.02 +/- 0.22 at rest and 3.39 +/- 0.59 for stress with no overlap in measures. MPR was 3.43 +/- 0.71, 1.91 +/- 0.65, and 1.16 +/- 0.19 using MCD, SLP, and CER. Both semiquantitative parameters (SLP and CER) significantly underestimated MPR (P < 0.001) and failed to completely discriminate rest and stress perfusion. CONCLUSION: Rest and stress MBF (mL/min/g) and MPR estimated by dual-bolus perfusion MRI fit within published ranges. Semiquantitative methods (SLP and CER) significantly underestimated MPR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hsu et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: