Premium
Myocardial perfusion quantification using simultaneously acquired 13 NH 3 ‐ammonia PET and dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI in patients at rest and stress
Author(s) -
Kunze Karl P.,
Nekolla Stephan G.,
Rischpler Christoph,
Zhang Shelley HuaLei,
Hayes Carmel,
Langwieser Nicolas,
Ibrahim Tareq,
Laugwitz KarlLudwig,
Schwaiger Markus
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
magnetic resonance in medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.696
H-Index - 225
eISSN - 1522-2594
pISSN - 0740-3194
DOI - 10.1002/mrm.27213
Subject(s) - perfusion , nuclear medicine , magnetic resonance imaging , perfusion scanning , hematocrit , deconvolution , dynamic contrast enhanced mri , medicine , nuclear magnetic resonance , radiology , mathematics , physics , algorithm
Purpose Systematic differences with respect to myocardial perfusion quantification exist between DCE‐MRI and PET. Using the potential of integrated PET/MRI, this study was conceived to compare perfusion quantification on the basis of simultaneously acquired 13 NH 3 ‐ammonia PET and DCE‐MRI data in patients at rest and stress. Methods Twenty‐nine patients were examined on a 3T PET/MRI scanner. DCE‐MRI was implemented in dual‐sequence design and additional T 1 mapping for signal normalization. Four different deconvolution methods including a modified version of the Fermi technique were compared against 13 NH 3 ‐ammonia results. Results Cohort‐average flow comparison yielded higher resting flows for DCE‐MRI than for PET and, therefore, significantly lower DCE‐MRI perfusion ratios under the common assumption of equal arterial and tissue hematocrit. Absolute flow values were strongly correlated in both slice‐average (R 2 = 0.82) and regional (R 2 = 0.7) evaluations. Different DCE‐MRI deconvolution methods yielded similar flow result with exception of an unconstrained Fermi method exhibiting outliers at high flows when compared with PET. Conclusion Thresholds for Ischemia classification may not be directly tradable between PET and MRI flow values. Differences in perfusion ratios between PET and DCE‐MRI may be lifted by using stress/rest‐specific hematocrit conversion. Proper physiological constraints are advised in model‐constrained deconvolution.