Key result
Quantitative CMR perfusion may improve reproducibility and diagnostic performance over qualitative analysis in CAD.
Why the study?
Quantification of myocardial perfusion by CMR may provide more reproducible and precise measurements than qualitative analysis, addressing limitations in patients with multivessel disease, left ventricular impairment, post-CABG, and angina with normal epicardial arteries.
May support quantitative over qualitative CMR perfusion in CAD; leaves open outcome impact and practice change.
Myocardial perfusion imaging has an important and expanding role, predominantly in the management of patients with coronary artery disease. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) perfusion imaging is particularly valuable as it does not use ionising radiation and is multiparametric—i.e., perfusion imaging is routinely combined with an assessment of myocardial structure, function and scar. Qualitative analysis of CMR perfusion images is the current clinical standard and this has repeatedly been shown to be accurate (1,2). However, quantification of perfusion should result in more reproducible and precise measurements and has potential advantages in a number of patient subsets. This includes patients with multivessel disease, where perfusion imaging frequently underestimates the number of ischaemic territories compared to invasive anatomic (3) and functional assessments (4), patients with left ventricular impairment and after CABG. Furthermore, quantification of perfusion may assist in the evaluation of patients with angina and normal epicardial coronary arteries, who are often poorly understood and managed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geraint Morton (2013) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease. Quantification of cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion vs. Qualitative analysis of CMR perfusion images was evaluated. Quantification of cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion may offer more reproducible measurements and advantages over qualitative analysis in patients with coronary artery disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: