Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Rationale behind Using Stress MRI over Nuclear Imaging for Cardiac Ischemia Evaluation


Affiliations
1 MRI Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
2 Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
3 Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, United States
4 University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, United States
 

Introduction: There are different methods for evaluating cardiac ischemia in a noninvasive way, most commonly used is nuclear stress testing. Another commonly performed investigation to evaluate coronary artery disease in symptomatic patients is coronary CT angiography. On one hand, coronary CT angiography provides anatomic information and stress testing using different modalities provides physiologic information. This physiologic information plays an important role in patient management than mere anatomic narrowing seen on CT angiography. Objectives: In this article, we are highlighting the role of cardiac MRI in this critical situation and its value over nuclear stress test. We will also discuss how cardiac MRI can help obtaining more added informations and obtaining differential diagnosis not always possible with nuclear imaging. Discussion: With continued advancement of MRI, stress MRI imaging is becoming another important modality and frequently used now a day to look for cardiac ischemia. This imaging modality provides physiologic information as stress nuclear imaging and also provides anatomic information. Delayed contrast enhanced imaging with MRI helps identifying areas of scar tissue and quantifying areas of viability. With MRI characterization of ischemic vs. non-ischemic cardiomyopathy is possible. Conclusion: On this article, we are highlighting the role of cardiac MRI evaluating cardiac ischemia and its value over nuclear stress test.

Keywords

Coronary Artery Disease, Ischemic Heart Disease, Stress Cardiac MRI.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM, Poon M, Carr JC, Gerstad NA, et al. ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardio 2006;48:1475–97.
  • Weinman HJ, Brash RC, Press WR, Wesley GE. Characteristics of gadolinium-data complex: a potential nmr contrast agent. AJR Am J Roentgen 1984;142:619–24.
  • Gould KL, Kelley KO, Bolson EL. Experimental validation of quantitative coronary arteriography for determining pressure-flow characteristics of coronary stenosis. Circulation 1982;66:930–7.
  • Jerosch-Herold M, Wilkes N, Wang Y, Gong GR, Mansoor AM, Huang H, et al. Direct comparison of an intravascular and an extracellular contrast agent for quantification of myocardial perfusion: cardiac MRI Group. Int J Cardiovascular Imaging 1999;15:453–64.
  • Saeed M, Higgins CB, Geschwind JF, Wend land MF. T1-relaxation kinetics of extracellular, intracellular and intravascular MR contrast agents in normal and acutely reperfused infarcted myocardium using echo-planar MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2000;10:310–8.
  • Kellman P, Arai AE. Imaging sequences for first pass perfusion - a review. J Cardiovascular Magn Reson 2007;9:525–37.
  • Araoz PA, Glockner JF, McGee KP, Potter DD, Jr, Valeti VU, Stanley DW, et al. 3 Tesla MR imaging provides improved contrast in first-pass myocardial perfusion imaging over a range of gadolinium doses. J CardioVasc Magn Reson 2005;7:559–64.
  • Klem I, Heitner JF, Shah DJ, Sketch MH, Behar V, Weinsaft J, et al. Improved detection of coronary artery disease by stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance with the use of delayed enhancement infarction imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:1630–8.
  • Wilke N, Jerosch-Herold M, Wang Y, Huang Y, Christensen BV, Stillman AE, et al. Myocardial perfusion reserve: assessment with multisection, quantitative, first-pass MR imaging. Radiology 1997;204:373–84.
  • Schreiber WG, Schmitt M, Kalden P, Mohrs OK, Kreitner KF, Thelen M. Dynamic contrast-enhanced myocardial perfusion imaging using saturation-prepared true FISP. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16:641–52.
  • Di Bella EV, Parker DL, Sinusas AJ. On the dark rim artifact in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI myocardial perfusion studies. Magn Reson Med 2005;54:1295–9.
  • Storey P, Chen Q, Li W, Edelman RR, Prasad PV. Band artifacts due to bulk motion. Magn Reson Med 2002;48:1028–36.
  • Prasad SR, Jagirdar J. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis/nephrogenicfibrosingdermopathy: a primer for radiologists. J Computer Assist Tomogr 2008;32:1–3.
  • Nandalur KR, Dwamena BA, Choudhury AF, Nandalur MR, Carlos RC. Diagnostic performance of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1343–53.
  • Bodi V, Sanchis J, Lopez-Lereu MP, Nunez J, Mainar L, Monmeneu JV, et al. Prognostic value of dipyridamole stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1174–9.
  • Rieber J, Huber A, Erhard I, Mueller S, Schreyer M, Koenig A, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease: a comparison with coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J 2006;27:1465–71.
  • Fritz-Hansen T, Hove JD, Kofoed KF, Kelbaek H, Larsson HB. Quantification of MRI measured myocardial perfusion reserve in healthy humans: a comparison with positron emission tomography. J Magn Reason Imaging 2008;27:818–24.
  • Waller AH, Blank stein R, Kwong RY, Di Carli MF. Myocardial blood flow quantification for evaluation of coronary artery disease by positron emission tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and computed tomography. Current Cardiology Reports 2014;16(5):483.

Abstract Views: 56

PDF Views: 0




  • Rationale behind Using Stress MRI over Nuclear Imaging for Cardiac Ischemia Evaluation

Abstract Views: 56  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Dhiraj Baruah
MRI Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, United States
Nishant Gupta
Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
Pranjal Boruah
Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, United States
Kaushir Shahir
University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, United States

Abstract


Introduction: There are different methods for evaluating cardiac ischemia in a noninvasive way, most commonly used is nuclear stress testing. Another commonly performed investigation to evaluate coronary artery disease in symptomatic patients is coronary CT angiography. On one hand, coronary CT angiography provides anatomic information and stress testing using different modalities provides physiologic information. This physiologic information plays an important role in patient management than mere anatomic narrowing seen on CT angiography. Objectives: In this article, we are highlighting the role of cardiac MRI in this critical situation and its value over nuclear stress test. We will also discuss how cardiac MRI can help obtaining more added informations and obtaining differential diagnosis not always possible with nuclear imaging. Discussion: With continued advancement of MRI, stress MRI imaging is becoming another important modality and frequently used now a day to look for cardiac ischemia. This imaging modality provides physiologic information as stress nuclear imaging and also provides anatomic information. Delayed contrast enhanced imaging with MRI helps identifying areas of scar tissue and quantifying areas of viability. With MRI characterization of ischemic vs. non-ischemic cardiomyopathy is possible. Conclusion: On this article, we are highlighting the role of cardiac MRI evaluating cardiac ischemia and its value over nuclear stress test.

Keywords


Coronary Artery Disease, Ischemic Heart Disease, Stress Cardiac MRI.

References