Key result
Quantitative myocardial blood flow via PET/CT or CMR improves diagnostic accuracy over traditional perfusion imaging.
Why the study?
Quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging offers additive diagnostic value over traditional methods, especially in complex cases like multivessel disease, but practical guidance on modality choice is needed.
Does quantitative myocardial blood flow assessment using PET/CT and CMR improve diagnostic accuracy over traditional perfusion imaging in patients with coronary artery disease?
Does quantitative myocardial blood flow assessment using PET/CT and CMR improve diagnostic accuracy over traditional perfusion imaging in patients with coronary artery disease?
Quantitative myocardial perfusion assessment using PET/CT and CMR provides additive diagnostic value over traditional imaging, especially in complex cases like multivessel disease.
May aid multivessel CAD diagnosis; leaves open need for prospective outcome trials before routine adoption.
Noninvasive imaging is the cornerstone in the diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease, which continues to be a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Of the modalities available, positron emission tomography/computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance have shown the highest accuracy for detecting flow-limiting coronary stenoses. Each modality additionally offers the ability to quantify the myocardial blood flow and myocardial perfusion reserve on a pixel-wise, segmental, and global level. Quantitative perfusion has shown additive diagnostic value over traditional perfusion imaging, particularly in difficult cases such as multivessel disease, and will likely be increasingly found in clinical workflows. This State-of-the-Art Review compares the principles, performance, limitations, and future directions of quantitative myocardial blood flow assessment using positron emission tomography/computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance and provides physicians with practical guidance on when to choose which test.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anderton et al. (2026) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease. Quantitative myocardial blood flow assessment using PET/CT and CMR vs. Traditional perfusion imaging was evaluated. Quantitative myocardial blood flow assessment using PET/CT and CMR provides additive diagnostic value over traditional perfusion imaging, particularly in difficult cases such as multivessel disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: