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 ±...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Korean journal of radiology 2018, 19(6), , pp.1007-1020
Main Authors: Min, Jee Young, Ko, Sung Min, Song, In Young, Yi, Jung Geun, Hwang, Hweung Kon, Shin, Je Kyoun
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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