Loading…
Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracies of 1.5T and 3T Stress Myocardial Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance for Detecting Significant Coronary Artery Disease
To compare the diagnostic performance of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial perfusion at 1.5- and 3-tesla (T) for detecting significant coronary artery disease (CAD), with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference method. We prospectively enrolled 281 patients (age 62.4 ±...
Saved in:
Published in: | Korean journal of radiology 2018, 19(6), , pp.1007-1020 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-c058c3ea71289af235e422a2b1dc42a9df0091c9ecca1b153ede0bd50b90f8803 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-c058c3ea71289af235e422a2b1dc42a9df0091c9ecca1b153ede0bd50b90f8803 |
container_end_page | 1020 |
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1007 |
container_title | Korean journal of radiology |
container_volume | 19 |
creator | Min, Jee Young Ko, Sung Min Song, In Young Yi, Jung Geun Hwang, Hweung Kon Shin, Je Kyoun |
description | To compare the diagnostic performance of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial perfusion at 1.5- and 3-tesla (T) for detecting significant coronary artery disease (CAD), with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference method.
We prospectively enrolled 281 patients (age 62.4 ± 8.3 years, 193 men) with suspected or known CAD who had undergone 1.5T or 3T CMR and ICA. Two independent radiologists interpreted perfusion defects. With ICA as the reference standard, the diagnostic performance of 1.5T and 3T CMR for identifying significant CAD (≥ 50% diameter reduction of the left main and ≥ 70% diameter reduction of other epicardial arteries) was determined.
No differences were observed in baseline characteristics or prevalence of CAD and old myocardial infarction (MI) using 1.5T (n = 135) or 3T (n = 146) systems. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for detecting significant CAD were similar between the 1.5T (84%, 64%, 74%, 76%, and 0.75 per patient and 68%, 83%, 66%, 84%, and 0.76 per vessel) and 3T (80%, 71%, 71%, 80%, and 0.76 per patient and 75%, 86%, 64%, 91%, and 0.81 per vessel) systems. In patients with multi-vessel CAD without old MI, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC with 3T were greater than those with 1.5T on a per-vessel basis (71% vs. 36%, 92% vs. 69%, and 0.82 vs. 0.53, respectively).
3T CMR has similar diagnostic performance to 1.5T CMR in detecting significant CAD, except for higher diagnostic performance in patients with multi-vessel CAD without old MI. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3348/kjr.2018.19.6.1007 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_nrf_k</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_nrf_kci_oai_kci_go_kr_ARTI_3866606</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2129533125</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-c058c3ea71289af235e422a2b1dc42a9df0091c9ecca1b153ede0bd50b90f8803</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkstu1DAUhi0EotPCC7BAltjAIsGX3LxBGmW4VGoFaoe15TgnU89k7MF2KvWF-pw4nVIBqyP5_OfzufwIvaEk57xoPu62PmeENjkVeZVTQupnaMEIKbOGc_IcLShjIqsEEyfoNIQtIUyQpniJTjjhTUU5X6D71u0PypvgLHYDjjeAV0ZtrAvRaLzUevJKGwhzkublGivbY77G19FDCPjyzmnle6NG_AP8MAWTOO384m5V0NOoPL5MOJhpV5B-UVYDHpzHK4igo7EbfG021gxGKxtx63zS-Du89BFSWJkAKsAr9GJQY4DXj_EM_fzyed1-yy6-fz1vlxeZLqoiZpqUjeagasoaoQbGSygYU6yjvS6YEv1AiKBagNaKdrTk0APp-pJ0ggxNQ_gZ-nDkWj_InTbSKfMQN07uvFxerc9lWl1VkSppPx21h6nbQ6_BRq9GefBmnwZ4qPw3Y81N4tzKKh1N1HUCvH8EePdrghDl3gQN46gsuClIRpkoOaesTNJ3_0m3bvI2rUKymjU0Dczn7tlRpb0LwcPw1AwlcraMTJaRs2UkFbKSs2VS0du_x3gq-eMR_htJJr_l</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2728171230</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracies of 1.5T and 3T Stress Myocardial Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance for Detecting Significant Coronary Artery Disease</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>PubMed Central (Open access)</source><creator>Min, Jee Young ; Ko, Sung Min ; Song, In Young ; Yi, Jung Geun ; Hwang, Hweung Kon ; Shin, Je Kyoun</creator><creatorcontrib>Min, Jee Young ; Ko, Sung Min ; Song, In Young ; Yi, Jung Geun ; Hwang, Hweung Kon ; Shin, Je Kyoun</creatorcontrib><description>To compare the diagnostic performance of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial perfusion at 1.5- and 3-tesla (T) for detecting significant coronary artery disease (CAD), with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference method.
We prospectively enrolled 281 patients (age 62.4 ± 8.3 years, 193 men) with suspected or known CAD who had undergone 1.5T or 3T CMR and ICA. Two independent radiologists interpreted perfusion defects. With ICA as the reference standard, the diagnostic performance of 1.5T and 3T CMR for identifying significant CAD (≥ 50% diameter reduction of the left main and ≥ 70% diameter reduction of other epicardial arteries) was determined.
No differences were observed in baseline characteristics or prevalence of CAD and old myocardial infarction (MI) using 1.5T (n = 135) or 3T (n = 146) systems. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for detecting significant CAD were similar between the 1.5T (84%, 64%, 74%, 76%, and 0.75 per patient and 68%, 83%, 66%, 84%, and 0.76 per vessel) and 3T (80%, 71%, 71%, 80%, and 0.76 per patient and 75%, 86%, 64%, 91%, and 0.81 per vessel) systems. In patients with multi-vessel CAD without old MI, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC with 3T were greater than those with 1.5T on a per-vessel basis (71% vs. 36%, 92% vs. 69%, and 0.82 vs. 0.53, respectively).
3T CMR has similar diagnostic performance to 1.5T CMR in detecting significant CAD, except for higher diagnostic performance in patients with multi-vessel CAD without old MI.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1229-6929</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2005-8330</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2018.19.6.1007</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30386133</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Korea (South): The Korean Society of Radiology</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Adenosine ; Cardiovascular disease ; Cardiovascular Imaging ; Contraindications ; Coronary vessels ; Heart ; Ischemia ; Patients ; Software ; Vein & artery diseases ; 방사선과학</subject><ispartof>Korean Journal of Radiology, 2018, 19(6), , pp.1007-1020</ispartof><rights>2018. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 The Korean Society of Radiology 2018 The Korean Society of Radiology</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-c058c3ea71289af235e422a2b1dc42a9df0091c9ecca1b153ede0bd50b90f8803</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-c058c3ea71289af235e422a2b1dc42a9df0091c9ecca1b153ede0bd50b90f8803</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2728171230/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2728171230?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,74998</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30386133$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002409685$$DAccess content in National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Min, Jee Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ko, Sung Min</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, In Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yi, Jung Geun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hwang, Hweung Kon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shin, Je Kyoun</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracies of 1.5T and 3T Stress Myocardial Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance for Detecting Significant Coronary Artery Disease</title><title>Korean journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Korean J Radiol</addtitle><description>To compare the diagnostic performance of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial perfusion at 1.5- and 3-tesla (T) for detecting significant coronary artery disease (CAD), with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference method.
We prospectively enrolled 281 patients (age 62.4 ± 8.3 years, 193 men) with suspected or known CAD who had undergone 1.5T or 3T CMR and ICA. Two independent radiologists interpreted perfusion defects. With ICA as the reference standard, the diagnostic performance of 1.5T and 3T CMR for identifying significant CAD (≥ 50% diameter reduction of the left main and ≥ 70% diameter reduction of other epicardial arteries) was determined.
No differences were observed in baseline characteristics or prevalence of CAD and old myocardial infarction (MI) using 1.5T (n = 135) or 3T (n = 146) systems. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for detecting significant CAD were similar between the 1.5T (84%, 64%, 74%, 76%, and 0.75 per patient and 68%, 83%, 66%, 84%, and 0.76 per vessel) and 3T (80%, 71%, 71%, 80%, and 0.76 per patient and 75%, 86%, 64%, 91%, and 0.81 per vessel) systems. In patients with multi-vessel CAD without old MI, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC with 3T were greater than those with 1.5T on a per-vessel basis (71% vs. 36%, 92% vs. 69%, and 0.82 vs. 0.53, respectively).
3T CMR has similar diagnostic performance to 1.5T CMR in detecting significant CAD, except for higher diagnostic performance in patients with multi-vessel CAD without old MI.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Adenosine</subject><subject>Cardiovascular disease</subject><subject>Cardiovascular Imaging</subject><subject>Contraindications</subject><subject>Coronary vessels</subject><subject>Heart</subject><subject>Ischemia</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Vein & artery diseases</subject><subject>방사선과학</subject><issn>1229-6929</issn><issn>2005-8330</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkstu1DAUhi0EotPCC7BAltjAIsGX3LxBGmW4VGoFaoe15TgnU89k7MF2KvWF-pw4nVIBqyP5_OfzufwIvaEk57xoPu62PmeENjkVeZVTQupnaMEIKbOGc_IcLShjIqsEEyfoNIQtIUyQpniJTjjhTUU5X6D71u0PypvgLHYDjjeAV0ZtrAvRaLzUevJKGwhzkublGivbY77G19FDCPjyzmnle6NG_AP8MAWTOO384m5V0NOoPL5MOJhpV5B-UVYDHpzHK4igo7EbfG021gxGKxtx63zS-Du89BFSWJkAKsAr9GJQY4DXj_EM_fzyed1-yy6-fz1vlxeZLqoiZpqUjeagasoaoQbGSygYU6yjvS6YEv1AiKBagNaKdrTk0APp-pJ0ggxNQ_gZ-nDkWj_InTbSKfMQN07uvFxerc9lWl1VkSppPx21h6nbQ6_BRq9GefBmnwZ4qPw3Y81N4tzKKh1N1HUCvH8EePdrghDl3gQN46gsuClIRpkoOaesTNJ3_0m3bvI2rUKymjU0Dczn7tlRpb0LwcPw1AwlcraMTJaRs2UkFbKSs2VS0du_x3gq-eMR_htJJr_l</recordid><startdate>20181101</startdate><enddate>20181101</enddate><creator>Min, Jee Young</creator><creator>Ko, Sung Min</creator><creator>Song, In Young</creator><creator>Yi, Jung Geun</creator><creator>Hwang, Hweung Kon</creator><creator>Shin, Je Kyoun</creator><general>The Korean Society of Radiology</general><general>대한영상의학회</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>ACYCR</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181101</creationdate><title>Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracies of 1.5T and 3T Stress Myocardial Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance for Detecting Significant Coronary Artery Disease</title><author>Min, Jee Young ; Ko, Sung Min ; Song, In Young ; Yi, Jung Geun ; Hwang, Hweung Kon ; Shin, Je Kyoun</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-c058c3ea71289af235e422a2b1dc42a9df0091c9ecca1b153ede0bd50b90f8803</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Adenosine</topic><topic>Cardiovascular disease</topic><topic>Cardiovascular Imaging</topic><topic>Contraindications</topic><topic>Coronary vessels</topic><topic>Heart</topic><topic>Ischemia</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Vein & artery diseases</topic><topic>방사선과학</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Min, Jee Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ko, Sung Min</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, In Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yi, Jung Geun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hwang, Hweung Kon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shin, Je Kyoun</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>Korean Citation Index</collection><jtitle>Korean journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Min, Jee Young</au><au>Ko, Sung Min</au><au>Song, In Young</au><au>Yi, Jung Geun</au><au>Hwang, Hweung Kon</au><au>Shin, Je Kyoun</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracies of 1.5T and 3T Stress Myocardial Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance for Detecting Significant Coronary Artery Disease</atitle><jtitle>Korean journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Korean J Radiol</addtitle><date>2018-11-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1007</spage><epage>1020</epage><pages>1007-1020</pages><issn>1229-6929</issn><eissn>2005-8330</eissn><abstract>To compare the diagnostic performance of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial perfusion at 1.5- and 3-tesla (T) for detecting significant coronary artery disease (CAD), with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference method.
We prospectively enrolled 281 patients (age 62.4 ± 8.3 years, 193 men) with suspected or known CAD who had undergone 1.5T or 3T CMR and ICA. Two independent radiologists interpreted perfusion defects. With ICA as the reference standard, the diagnostic performance of 1.5T and 3T CMR for identifying significant CAD (≥ 50% diameter reduction of the left main and ≥ 70% diameter reduction of other epicardial arteries) was determined.
No differences were observed in baseline characteristics or prevalence of CAD and old myocardial infarction (MI) using 1.5T (n = 135) or 3T (n = 146) systems. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for detecting significant CAD were similar between the 1.5T (84%, 64%, 74%, 76%, and 0.75 per patient and 68%, 83%, 66%, 84%, and 0.76 per vessel) and 3T (80%, 71%, 71%, 80%, and 0.76 per patient and 75%, 86%, 64%, 91%, and 0.81 per vessel) systems. In patients with multi-vessel CAD without old MI, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC with 3T were greater than those with 1.5T on a per-vessel basis (71% vs. 36%, 92% vs. 69%, and 0.82 vs. 0.53, respectively).
3T CMR has similar diagnostic performance to 1.5T CMR in detecting significant CAD, except for higher diagnostic performance in patients with multi-vessel CAD without old MI.</abstract><cop>Korea (South)</cop><pub>The Korean Society of Radiology</pub><pmid>30386133</pmid><doi>10.3348/kjr.2018.19.6.1007</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1229-6929 |
ispartof | Korean Journal of Radiology, 2018, 19(6), , pp.1007-1020 |
issn | 1229-6929 2005-8330 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_nrf_kci_oai_kci_go_kr_ARTI_3866606 |
source | Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); PubMed Central (Open access) |
subjects | Accuracy Adenosine Cardiovascular disease Cardiovascular Imaging Contraindications Coronary vessels Heart Ischemia Patients Software Vein & artery diseases 방사선과학 |
title | Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracies of 1.5T and 3T Stress Myocardial Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance for Detecting Significant Coronary Artery Disease |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T19%3A50%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_nrf_k&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20the%20Diagnostic%20Accuracies%20of%201.5T%20and%203T%20Stress%20Myocardial%20Perfusion%20Cardiovascular%20Magnetic%20Resonance%20for%20Detecting%20Significant%20Coronary%20Artery%20Disease&rft.jtitle=Korean%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=Min,%20Jee%20Young&rft.date=2018-11-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1007&rft.epage=1020&rft.pages=1007-1020&rft.issn=1229-6929&rft.eissn=2005-8330&rft_id=info:doi/10.3348/kjr.2018.19.6.1007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_nrf_k%3E2129533125%3C/proquest_nrf_k%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-c058c3ea71289af235e422a2b1dc42a9df0091c9ecca1b153ede0bd50b90f8803%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2728171230&rft_id=info:pmid/30386133&rfr_iscdi=true |