Premium
Comparison of intravascular and extracellular contrast media for absolute quantification of myocardial rest‐perfusion using high‐resolution MRI
Author(s) -
Ritter Christian O.,
Wilke Aline,
Wichmann Tobias,
Beer Meinrad,
Hahn Dietbert,
Köstler Herbert
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.22557
Subject(s) - perfusion , medicine , steady state free precession imaging , nuclear medicine , contrast (vision) , perfusion scanning , magnetic resonance imaging , repeatability , radiology , physics , mathematics , optics , statistics
Purpose: To use the contrast agent gadofosveset for absolute quantification of myocardial perfusion and compare it with gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd‐BOPTA) using a high‐resolution generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition (GRAPPA) sequence. Materials and Methods: Ten healthy volunteers were examined twice at two different dates with a first‐pass perfusion examination at rest using prebolus technique. We used a 1.5 T scanner and a 32 channel heart‐array coil with a steady‐state free precession (SSFP) true fast imaging with steady state precession (trueFISP) GRAPPA sequence (acceleration‐factor 3). Manual delineation of the myocardial contours was performed and absolute quantification was performed after baseline and contamination correction. At the first appointment, 1cc/4cc of the extracellular contrast agent Gd‐BOPTA were administered, on the second date, 1cc/4cc of the blood pool contrast agent (CA) gadofosveset. At each date the examination was repeated after a 15‐minute time interval. Results: Using gadofosveset perfusion the value (in cc/g/min) at rest was 0.66 ± 0.25 (mean ± standard deviation) for the first, and 0.55 ± 0.24 for the second CA application; for Gd‐BOPTA it was 0.62 ± 0.25 and 0.45 ± 0.23. No significant difference was found between the acquired perfusion values. The apparent mean residence time in the myocardium was 23 seconds for gadofosveset and 19.5 seconds for Gd‐BOPTA. Neither signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) nor subjectively rated image contrast showed a significant difference. Conclusion: The application of gadofosveset for an absolute quantification of myocardial perfusion is possible. Yet the acquired perfusion values show no significant differences to those determined with Gd‐BOPTA, maintained the same SNR and comparable perfusion values, and did not picture the expected concentration time‐course for an intravasal CA in the first pass. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2011;33:1047–1051. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.