Department of Bioengineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Magn Reson Med. 2010 Jul;64(1):125-37. doi: 10.1002/mrm.22282.
Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI has been used to quantify myocardial perfusion in recent years. Published results have varied widely, possibly depending on the method used to analyze the dynamic perfusion data. Here, four quantitative analysis methods (two-compartment modeling, Fermi function modeling, model-independent analysis, and Patlak plot analysis) were implemented and compared for quantifying myocardial perfusion. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI data were acquired in 20 human subjects at rest with low-dose (0.019 +/- 0.005 mmol/kg) bolus injections of gadolinium. Fourteen of these subjects were also imaged at adenosine stress (0.021 +/- 0.005 mmol/kg). Aggregate rest perfusion estimates were not significantly different between all four analysis methods. At stress, perfusion estimates were not significantly different between two-compartment modeling, model-independent analysis, and Patlak plot analysis. Stress estimates from the Fermi model were significantly higher (approximately 20%) than the other three methods. Myocardial perfusion reserve values were not significantly different between all four methods. Model-independent analysis resulted in the lowest model curve-fit errors. When more than just the first pass of data was analyzed, perfusion estimates from two-compartment modeling and model-independent analysis did not change significantly, unlike results from Fermi function modeling.
近年来,动态对比增强 MRI 已被用于量化心肌灌注。已发表的结果差异很大,这可能取决于用于分析动态灌注数据的方法。在这里,实施了四种定量分析方法(双室模型、费米函数模型、模型独立分析和 Patlak 图分析),用于量化心肌灌注。在 20 名静息状态的人类受试者中进行了低剂量(0.019 +/- 0.005 mmol/kg)钆对比剂团注的动态对比增强 MRI 数据采集。其中 14 名受试者还在腺苷应激(0.021 +/- 0.005 mmol/kg)下进行了成像。所有四种分析方法的总静息灌注估计值没有显著差异。在应激状态下,双室模型、模型独立分析和 Patlak 图分析之间的灌注估计值没有显著差异。费米模型的应激估计值比其他三种方法高约 20%。四种方法的心肌灌注储备值均无显著差异。模型独立分析产生的模型曲线拟合误差最低。当分析的数据不仅仅是第一次通过时,双室模型和模型独立分析的灌注估计值没有明显变化,而费米函数模型的结果则不同。