Abstract
Aim To evaluate the eficacy of the Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Perfusion (CMRP) method in detection of Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) by comparing CMRP indings with the results of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA) or Catheter Coronary Angiography (CCA). Methods Thirty one patients in whom CMRP was performed along with CCTA or CCA within a month after CMRP between December 2009 and November 2010 were selected for the study. In CMRP, after adenosine administration as a stress agent Balanced TFE sequences were used to gather dynamic images that include the myocardial irst pass of contrast media. Image analysis was performed visually. CMRP indings were compared to CCTA or CCA results for each coronary artery territories and for all territories. Results Sensitivity, speciicity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of CMRP test in the identiication of patients with signiicant (≥70%) coronary artery stenosis were 94.7%, 83%, 90.3%, 90%, and 90.9% for all coronary arteries, respectively; 94.4%, 84.6%, 90.3%, 89.4%, and 91.6% for left anterior descending artery, respectively; and 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%, and 100% for circumlex and right coronary artery, respectively. There was no statistically signiicant difference between angiography methods (CCTA/CCA) and CMRP (p>0.05). Methods had good to perfect consistency (K{green} = 0.79-1.00). Conclusion CMRP test seems to be a reasonable alternative for catheter angiography, which is considered the gold standard for evaluation of CAD and exclusion of signiicant coronary artery obstruction.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 63-69 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Medicinski Glasnik |
| Volume | 10 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| State | Published - Feb 4 2013 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Cardiac catheterization
- Computed tomography
- Coronary angiography
- Perfusion magnetic resonance imaging
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
Cite this
Evaluation of myocardial ischemia in coronary artery disease with cardiac MR perfusion method : Comparison with the results of catheter or CT angiography. / Doǧan, Mehmet Sait; Yilmaz, Erkan; Doǧan, Sümeyra; Akdeniz, Bahri; Bariş, Nezihi; Teomete, Uygar; Iyilikçi, Leyla.
In: Medicinski Glasnik, Vol. 10, No. 1, 04.02.2013, p. 63-69.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of myocardial ischemia in coronary artery disease with cardiac MR perfusion method
T2 - Comparison with the results of catheter or CT angiography
AU - Doǧan, Mehmet Sait
AU - Yilmaz, Erkan
AU - Doǧan, Sümeyra
AU - Akdeniz, Bahri
AU - Bariş, Nezihi
AU - Teomete, Uygar
AU - Iyilikçi, Leyla
PY - 2013/2/4
Y1 - 2013/2/4
N2 - Aim To evaluate the eficacy of the Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Perfusion (CMRP) method in detection of Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) by comparing CMRP indings with the results of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA) or Catheter Coronary Angiography (CCA). Methods Thirty one patients in whom CMRP was performed along with CCTA or CCA within a month after CMRP between December 2009 and November 2010 were selected for the study. In CMRP, after adenosine administration as a stress agent Balanced TFE sequences were used to gather dynamic images that include the myocardial irst pass of contrast media. Image analysis was performed visually. CMRP indings were compared to CCTA or CCA results for each coronary artery territories and for all territories. Results Sensitivity, speciicity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of CMRP test in the identiication of patients with signiicant (≥70%) coronary artery stenosis were 94.7%, 83%, 90.3%, 90%, and 90.9% for all coronary arteries, respectively; 94.4%, 84.6%, 90.3%, 89.4%, and 91.6% for left anterior descending artery, respectively; and 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%, and 100% for circumlex and right coronary artery, respectively. There was no statistically signiicant difference between angiography methods (CCTA/CCA) and CMRP (p>0.05). Methods had good to perfect consistency (K{green} = 0.79-1.00). Conclusion CMRP test seems to be a reasonable alternative for catheter angiography, which is considered the gold standard for evaluation of CAD and exclusion of signiicant coronary artery obstruction.
AB - Aim To evaluate the eficacy of the Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Perfusion (CMRP) method in detection of Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) by comparing CMRP indings with the results of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA) or Catheter Coronary Angiography (CCA). Methods Thirty one patients in whom CMRP was performed along with CCTA or CCA within a month after CMRP between December 2009 and November 2010 were selected for the study. In CMRP, after adenosine administration as a stress agent Balanced TFE sequences were used to gather dynamic images that include the myocardial irst pass of contrast media. Image analysis was performed visually. CMRP indings were compared to CCTA or CCA results for each coronary artery territories and for all territories. Results Sensitivity, speciicity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of CMRP test in the identiication of patients with signiicant (≥70%) coronary artery stenosis were 94.7%, 83%, 90.3%, 90%, and 90.9% for all coronary arteries, respectively; 94.4%, 84.6%, 90.3%, 89.4%, and 91.6% for left anterior descending artery, respectively; and 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%, and 100% for circumlex and right coronary artery, respectively. There was no statistically signiicant difference between angiography methods (CCTA/CCA) and CMRP (p>0.05). Methods had good to perfect consistency (K{green} = 0.79-1.00). Conclusion CMRP test seems to be a reasonable alternative for catheter angiography, which is considered the gold standard for evaluation of CAD and exclusion of signiicant coronary artery obstruction.
KW - Cardiac catheterization
KW - Computed tomography
KW - Coronary angiography
KW - Perfusion magnetic resonance imaging
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84873853991&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84873853991&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 23348164
AN - SCOPUS:84873853991
VL - 10
SP - 63
EP - 69
JO - Medicinski Glasnik
JF - Medicinski Glasnik
SN - 1840-0132
IS - 1
ER -