School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2022 Dec;56(6):1707-1719. doi: 10.1002/jmri.28180. Epub 2022 Mar 26.
Acquisition of magnetic resonance first-pass perfusion images is synchronized to the patient's heart rate (HR) and governs the temporal resolution. This is inherently linked to the process of myocardial blood flow (MBF) quantification and impacts MBF accuracy but to an unclear extent.
To assess the impact of temporal resolution on quantitative perfusion and compare approaches for accounting for its variability.
Prospective phantom and retrospective clinical study.
Simulations, a cardiac perfusion phantom, and 30 patients with (16, 53%) or without (14, 47%) coronary artery disease.
FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3.0 T/2D saturation recovery spoiled gradient echo sequence.
Dynamic perfusion data were simulated for a range of reference MBF (1 mL/g/min-5 mL/g/min) and HR (30 bpm-150 bpm). Perfusion imaging was performed in patients and a phantom for different temporal resolutions. MBF and myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) were quantified without correction for temporal resolution or following correction by either MBF scaling based on the sampling interval or data interpolation prior to quantification. Simulated data were quantified using Fermi deconvolution, truncated singular value decomposition, and one-compartment modeling, whereas phantom and clinical data were quantified using Fermi deconvolution alone.
Shapiro-Wilk tests for normality, percentage error (PE) for measuring MBF accuracy in simulations, and one-way repeated measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction to compare clinical MBF and MPR. Statistical significance set at P < 0.05.
For Fermi deconvolution and an example simulated 1 mL/g/min, the MBF PE without correction for temporal resolution was between 55.4% and -62.7% across 30-150 bpm. PE was between -22.2% and -6.8% following MBF scaling and between -14.2% and -14.2% following data interpolation across the same HR. An interpolated HR of 240 bpm reduced PE to ≤10%. Clinical rest and stress MBF and MPR were significantly different between analyses.
Accurate perfusion quantification needs to account for the variability of temporal resolution, with data interpolation prior to quantification reducing MBF variability across different resolutions.
3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 1.
磁共振首过灌注图像的采集与患者的心率(HR)同步,决定了时间分辨率。这与心肌血流(MBF)定量过程密切相关,并在一定程度上影响 MBF 的准确性,但具体影响程度尚不清楚。
评估时间分辨率对定量灌注的影响,并比较不同方法对其变异性的校正效果。
前瞻性的体模和回顾性的临床研究。
模拟、心脏灌注体模、30 名患者(16 名,53%)或无(14 名,47%)冠状动脉疾病患者。
磁场强度/序列:3.0T/二维反转恢复饱和梯度回波序列。
为一系列参考 MBF(1mL/g/min-5mL/g/min)和 HR(30bpm-150bpm)模拟动态灌注数据。对不同时间分辨率的患者和体模进行灌注成像。在不校正时间分辨率的情况下或校正方法为基于采样间隔的 MBF 缩放或量化前数据插值的情况下,对 MBF 和心肌灌注储备(MPR)进行定量。模拟数据使用费米反卷积、截断奇异值分解和单室模型进行定量,而体模和临床数据仅使用费米反卷积进行定量。
正态性的 Shapiro-Wilk 检验,用于模拟中测量 MBF 准确性的百分比误差(PE),以及单因素重复测量方差分析,采用 Bonferroni 校正比较临床 MBF 和 MPR。P 值<0.05 具有统计学意义。
对于费米反卷积和一个模拟的 1mL/g/min 示例,在 30-150bpm 心率范围内,不校正时间分辨率的 MBF PE 介于 55.4%-62.7%之间。校正 MBF 缩放和量化前数据插值后,PE 分别为-22.2%-6.8%和-14.2%-14.2%。HR 插值为 240bpm 可将 PE 降低至≤10%。临床静息和应激 MBF 和 MPR 分析之间存在显著差异。
准确的灌注定量需要考虑时间分辨率的可变性,在量化前进行数据插值可以降低不同分辨率下的 MBF 变异性。
3 技术功效等级:1。