Patel Mita B, Mor-Avi Victor, Kawaji Keigo, Nathan Sandeep, Kramer Christopher M, Lang Roberto M, Patel Amit R
Department of Medicine, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Department of Medicine, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Am J Cardiol. 2016 Apr 1;117(7):1072-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.12.054. Epub 2016 Jan 14.
In clinical practice, perfusion at rest in vasodilator stress single-photon emission computed tomography is commonly used to confirm myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemia and to rule out artifacts. It is unclear whether perfusion at rest carries similar information in cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). We sought to determine whether chronic MI is associated with abnormal perfusion at rest on CMR. We compared areas of infarct and remote myocardium in 31 patients who underwent vasodilator stress CMR (1.5 T), had MI confirmed by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE scar), and coronary angiography within 6 months. Stress perfusion imaging during gadolinium first pass was followed by reversal with aminophylline (75 to 125 mg), rest perfusion, and LGE imaging. Resting and peak-stress time-intensity curves were used to obtain maximal upslopes (normalized by blood pool upslopes), which were compared between infarcted and remote myocardial regions of interest. At rest, there was no significant difference between the slopes in the regions of interest supplied by arteries with and without stenosis >70% (0.31 ± 0.16 vs 0.26 ± 0.15 1/s), irrespective of LGE scar. However, at peak stress, we found significant differences (0.20 ± 0.11 vs 0.30 ± 0.22 1/s; p <0.05), reflecting the expected stress-induced ischemia. Similarly, at rest, there was no difference between infarcted and remote myocardium (0.27 ± 0.14 vs 0.30 ± 0.17 1/s), irrespective of stenosis, but significant differences were seen during stress (0.21 ± 0.16 vs 0.28 ± 0.18 1/s; p <0.001), reflecting inducible ischemia. In conclusion, abnormalities in myocardial perfusion at rest associated with chronic MI are not reliably detectable on CMR images. Accordingly, unlike single-photon emission computed tomography, normal CMR perfusion at rest should not be used to rule out chronic MI.
在临床实践中,血管扩张剂负荷单光子发射计算机断层扫描静息灌注常用于确诊心肌梗死(MI)和心肌缺血,并排除伪影。目前尚不清楚在心血管磁共振成像(CMR)中静息灌注是否携带相似信息。我们试图确定慢性MI是否与CMR静息灌注异常相关。我们比较了31例接受血管扩张剂负荷CMR(1.5 T)检查、经延迟钆增强(LGE瘢痕)确诊为MI且在6个月内进行了冠状动脉造影的患者梗死心肌和远隔心肌区域。钆首次通过期间的负荷灌注成像后用氨茶碱(75至125 mg)进行反转,然后进行静息灌注和LGE成像。使用静息和峰值负荷时间-强度曲线获取最大上升斜率(通过血池上升斜率进行归一化),并在梗死心肌和远隔心肌感兴趣区域之间进行比较。静息时,无论有无LGE瘢痕,狭窄>70%和无狭窄的动脉供血的感兴趣区域斜率之间均无显著差异(0.31±0.16 vs 0.26±0.15 1/s)。然而,在峰值负荷时,我们发现存在显著差异(0.20±0.11 vs 0.30±0.22 1/s;p<0.05),反映了预期的负荷诱导性缺血。同样,静息时,无论有无狭窄,梗死心肌和远隔心肌之间均无差异(0.27±0.14 vs 0.30±0.17 1/s),但在负荷期间可见显著差异(0.21±0.16 vs 0.28±0.18 1/s;p<0.001),反映了诱导性缺血。总之,CMR图像上无法可靠检测到与慢性MI相关的静息心肌灌注异常。因此,与单光子发射计算机断层扫描不同,CMR静息灌注正常不应被用于排除慢性MI。