These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A Comparison of Theory-Based and Experimentally Determined Myocardial Signal Intensity Correction Methods in First-Pass Perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
    Author: Fluckiger JU, Benefield BC, Bakhos L, Harris KR, Lee DC.
    Journal: Comput Math Methods Med; 2015; 2015():843741. PubMed ID: 26491465.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of correcting myocardial signal saturation on the accuracy of absolute myocardial blood flow (MBF) measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed 15 dual bolus first-pass perfusion studies in 7 dogs during global coronary vasodilation and variable degrees of coronary artery stenosis. We compared microsphere MBF to MBF calculated from uncorrected and corrected MRI signal. Four correction methods were tested, two theoretical methods (Th1 and Th2) and two empirical methods (Em1 and Em2). RESULTS: The correlations with microsphere MBF (n = 90 segments) were: uncorrected (y = 0.47x + 1.1, r = 0.70), Th1 (y = 0.53x + 1.0, r = 0.71), Th2 (y = 0.62x + 0.86, r = 0.73), Em1 (y = 0.82x + 0.86, r = 0.77), and Em2 (y = 0.72x + 0.84, r = 0.75). All corrected methods were not significantly different from microspheres, while uncorrected MBF values were significantly lower. For the top 50% of microsphere MBF values, flows were significantly underestimated by uncorrected SI (31%), Th1 (25%), and Th2 (19%), while Em1 (1%), and Em2 (9%) were similar to microsphere MBF. CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial signal saturation should be corrected prior to flow modeling to avoid underestimation of MBF by MR perfusion imaging.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]