Comparison of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease

Se Yeong Chung, Kang Young Lee, Eun Ju Chun, Won Woo Lee, Eun Kyung Park, Hyuk-Jae Chang, Sang Il Choi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for the detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively enrolled 78 patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease who underwent both stress perfusion MRI and SPECT within 4 weeks of each other. Image analysis was performed to compare the diagnostic value of stress perfusion MRI with that of SPECT; coronary angiography was used as the reference standard. The statistical significance of the difference between stress perfusion MRI and SPECT was evaluated by use of the paired McNemar test. RESULTS. Myocardial ischemia was detected significantly more often by stress perfusion MRI than by SPECT, with more abnormal segments (mean ± SD, 10.1 ± 3.6 vs 4.9 ± 2.6; p < 0.001) and abnormal vascular territories (2.55 ± 0.5 vs 1.64 ± 0.7; p < 0.001) identified per patient. The overall sensitivity for identifying perfusion defects in three vascular territories was higher for stress perfusion MRI than for SPECT (84.6% vs 55.1%; p < 0.001). The sensitivity of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detecting any perfusion defect per patient was 100% and 96.2%, respectively. However, perfusion defects in all three vascular territories were detected in 57.7% of patients by stress perfusion MRI but in only 11.5% of patients by SPECT. CONCLUSION. Stress perfusion MRI is superior to SPECT for detecting myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)356-362
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume195
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Single-Photon Emission-Computed Tomography
Myocardial Ischemia
Coronary Artery Disease
Perfusion
Blood Vessels
Coronary Angiography

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Chung, Se Yeong ; Lee, Kang Young ; Chun, Eun Ju ; Lee, Won Woo ; Park, Eun Kyung ; Chang, Hyuk-Jae ; Choi, Sang Il. / Comparison of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease. In: American Journal of Roentgenology. 2010 ; Vol. 195, No. 2. pp. 356-362.
@article{190c2dc81f3d4583bc2df0eae4157eea,
title = "Comparison of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for the detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively enrolled 78 patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease who underwent both stress perfusion MRI and SPECT within 4 weeks of each other. Image analysis was performed to compare the diagnostic value of stress perfusion MRI with that of SPECT; coronary angiography was used as the reference standard. The statistical significance of the difference between stress perfusion MRI and SPECT was evaluated by use of the paired McNemar test. RESULTS. Myocardial ischemia was detected significantly more often by stress perfusion MRI than by SPECT, with more abnormal segments (mean ± SD, 10.1 ± 3.6 vs 4.9 ± 2.6; p < 0.001) and abnormal vascular territories (2.55 ± 0.5 vs 1.64 ± 0.7; p < 0.001) identified per patient. The overall sensitivity for identifying perfusion defects in three vascular territories was higher for stress perfusion MRI than for SPECT (84.6{\%} vs 55.1{\%}; p < 0.001). The sensitivity of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detecting any perfusion defect per patient was 100{\%} and 96.2{\%}, respectively. However, perfusion defects in all three vascular territories were detected in 57.7{\%} of patients by stress perfusion MRI but in only 11.5{\%} of patients by SPECT. CONCLUSION. Stress perfusion MRI is superior to SPECT for detecting myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease.",
author = "Chung, {Se Yeong} and Lee, {Kang Young} and Chun, {Eun Ju} and Lee, {Won Woo} and Park, {Eun Kyung} and Hyuk-Jae Chang and Choi, {Sang Il}",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2214/AJR.08.1839",
language = "English",
volume = "195",
pages = "356--362",
journal = "American Journal of Roentgenology",
issn = "0361-803X",
publisher = "American Roentgen Ray Society",
number = "2",

}

Comparison of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease. / Chung, Se Yeong; Lee, Kang Young; Chun, Eun Ju; Lee, Won Woo; Park, Eun Kyung; Chang, Hyuk-Jae; Choi, Sang Il.

In: American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 195, No. 2, 01.01.2010, p. 356-362.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease

AU - Chung, Se Yeong

AU - Lee, Kang Young

AU - Chun, Eun Ju

AU - Lee, Won Woo

AU - Park, Eun Kyung

AU - Chang, Hyuk-Jae

AU - Choi, Sang Il

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for the detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively enrolled 78 patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease who underwent both stress perfusion MRI and SPECT within 4 weeks of each other. Image analysis was performed to compare the diagnostic value of stress perfusion MRI with that of SPECT; coronary angiography was used as the reference standard. The statistical significance of the difference between stress perfusion MRI and SPECT was evaluated by use of the paired McNemar test. RESULTS. Myocardial ischemia was detected significantly more often by stress perfusion MRI than by SPECT, with more abnormal segments (mean ± SD, 10.1 ± 3.6 vs 4.9 ± 2.6; p < 0.001) and abnormal vascular territories (2.55 ± 0.5 vs 1.64 ± 0.7; p < 0.001) identified per patient. The overall sensitivity for identifying perfusion defects in three vascular territories was higher for stress perfusion MRI than for SPECT (84.6% vs 55.1%; p < 0.001). The sensitivity of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detecting any perfusion defect per patient was 100% and 96.2%, respectively. However, perfusion defects in all three vascular territories were detected in 57.7% of patients by stress perfusion MRI but in only 11.5% of patients by SPECT. CONCLUSION. Stress perfusion MRI is superior to SPECT for detecting myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease.

AB - OBJECTIVE. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for the detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively enrolled 78 patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease who underwent both stress perfusion MRI and SPECT within 4 weeks of each other. Image analysis was performed to compare the diagnostic value of stress perfusion MRI with that of SPECT; coronary angiography was used as the reference standard. The statistical significance of the difference between stress perfusion MRI and SPECT was evaluated by use of the paired McNemar test. RESULTS. Myocardial ischemia was detected significantly more often by stress perfusion MRI than by SPECT, with more abnormal segments (mean ± SD, 10.1 ± 3.6 vs 4.9 ± 2.6; p < 0.001) and abnormal vascular territories (2.55 ± 0.5 vs 1.64 ± 0.7; p < 0.001) identified per patient. The overall sensitivity for identifying perfusion defects in three vascular territories was higher for stress perfusion MRI than for SPECT (84.6% vs 55.1%; p < 0.001). The sensitivity of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detecting any perfusion defect per patient was 100% and 96.2%, respectively. However, perfusion defects in all three vascular territories were detected in 57.7% of patients by stress perfusion MRI but in only 11.5% of patients by SPECT. CONCLUSION. Stress perfusion MRI is superior to SPECT for detecting myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77955622536&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77955622536&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2214/AJR.08.1839

DO - 10.2214/AJR.08.1839

M3 - Article

C2 - 20651190

AN - SCOPUS:77955622536

VL - 195

SP - 356

EP - 362

JO - American Journal of Roentgenology

JF - American Journal of Roentgenology

SN - 0361-803X

IS - 2

ER -