English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

To evaluate the accuracy of contrast-enhanced whole-heart magnetic resonance coronary angiography at 3.0T for assessing significant stenosis (≥50% lumen diameter reduction) in patients with myocardial infarction, by using conventional coronary artery angiography as the reference standard, and also test the performance of that for the detection and assessment of chronic myocardial infarction (MI), compared with standard delayed-enhancement coronary magnetic resonance (DE-CMR) for the determination of infarct size.We studied 42 consecutive patients (37 men, 5 women, mean age 58.5 ± 10.7 years) with MI scheduled for conventional coronary angiography. Contrast-enhanced whole-heart coronary magnetic resonance angiography (CMRA) was employed after sublingual nitroglycerin (NTG) with the abdominal banding rolled tightly along the side of ribs. Finally, a 3D phase-sensitive inversion-recovery gradient-echo (3D-PSIR-GRE) sequence was performed during free breathing. The assessment of MI sizes on WH-CMRA reconstructed images and 3D-PSIR-GRE images were compared using a paired student t test.The acquisition of CMRA was completed in 40 (95.2%) of 42 patients, with an imaging time averaged at 9.5 ± 3.1 minutes. The average navigator efficiency was 47%. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of whole-heart CMRA for the detection of significant lesions on a segment-by-segment analysis were 91.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 83.8-96.1), 84.0% (95% CI 80.0-87.4), 57.9% (95% CI 50.0-65.8), 97.7% (95% CI 95.3-98.9), respectively, and on a patient-based analysis 93.5% (95% CI 77.2-98.9), 88.9% (95% CI 50.7-99.4), 96.7% (95% CI 80.9-99.8), and 80.0% (95% CI 44.2-96.5), respectively. Infarcts were generally higher on the CE-CMRA technique compared with the standard technique (18.0 ± 7.2 cm vs 16.1 ± 6.4 cm; P < .0001).Contrast-enhanced whole-heart CMRA with 3.0-T not only may permit reliable detection of significant obstructive coronary artery disease in patients with myocardial infarction, but also could identify and quantify the volume of myocardial infarction. This technique could be considered the preferred approach in patients who could not overcome longer scanning times or unable to hold their breath instead of delayed-enhancement magnetic resonance imaging for detection of infarcted myocardium. However, compared with standard imaging, the volume of myocardial infarction is slightly overestimated.

medicine

3.0T Contrast-enhanced whole-heart coronary magnetic resonance angiography for simultaneous coronary artery angiography and myocardial viability in chronic myocardial infarction