TY - JOUR
T1 - Diagnostic performance of quantitative perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with prior coronary artery disease
AU - Hoek, Roel
AU - Borodzicz-Jazdzyk, Sonia
AU - van Diemen, Pepijn A.
AU - Somsen, Yvemarie B. O.
AU - de Winter, Ruben W.
AU - Jukema, Ruurt A.
AU - Twisk, Jos W. R.
AU - Raijmakers, Pieter G.
AU - Knuuti, Juhani
AU - Maaniitty, Teemu
AU - Underwood, S. Richard
AU - Nagel, Eike
AU - Robbers, Lourens F. H. J.
AU - Demirkiran, Ahmet
AU - von Bartheld, Martin B.
AU - Driessen, Roel S.
AU - Danad, Ibrahim
AU - Götte, Marco J. W.
AU - Knaapen, Paul
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.
PY - 2025/2/1
Y1 - 2025/2/1
N2 - 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 the 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 and/or percutaneous coronary intervention. 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 that of PET (P = 0.015), whereas the specificity of QP-CMR and PET was comparable. Diagnostic accuracy and area under the curve of QP-CMR (64% and 0.66) was comparable to both v-CMR [66% (P = not significant [NS]) and 0.67 (P = NS)] and PET [74% (P = NS) and 0.78 (P = NS)]. Conclusion In patients with prior myocardial infarction and/or percutaneous coronary intervention, 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.
AB - 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 the 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 and/or percutaneous coronary intervention. 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 that of PET (P = 0.015), whereas the specificity of QP-CMR and PET was comparable. Diagnostic accuracy and area under the curve of QP-CMR (64% and 0.66) was comparable to both v-CMR [66% (P = not significant [NS]) and 0.67 (P = NS)] and PET [74% (P = NS) and 0.78 (P = NS)]. Conclusion In patients with prior myocardial infarction and/or percutaneous coronary intervention, 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.
KW - fractional flow reserve
KW - myocardial perfusion imaging
KW - positron emission tomography
KW - quantitative perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85216869130
U2 - 10.1093/ehjci/jeae262
DO - 10.1093/ehjci/jeae262
M3 - Article
C2 - 39382154
SN - 2047-2404
VL - 26
SP - 207
EP - 217
JO - European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging
JF - European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging
IS - 2
ER -
