scholarly journals Quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging using a step arterial-input function

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. O11
Author(s):  
Richard B Thompson ◽  
Justin Grenier ◽  
Emer Sonnex ◽  
Richard Coulden
2013 ◽  
Vol 61 (10) ◽  
pp. E1052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fahad Iqbal ◽  
Wael AlJaroudi ◽  
Aaron Sweeney ◽  
Jaekyeong Heo ◽  
Ami Iskandrian ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 711-718 ◽  
Author(s):  
John D. Biglands ◽  
Montasir Ibraheem ◽  
Derek R. Magee ◽  
Aleksandra Radjenovic ◽  
Sven Plein ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 880-887 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Tran-Gia ◽  
David Lohr ◽  
Andreas Max Weng ◽  
Christian Oliver Ritter ◽  
Daniel Stäb ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 246-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.O. Ritter ◽  
M. Kowalski ◽  
A. M. Weng ◽  
M. Beer ◽  
D. Hahn ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qi Huang ◽  
Ye Tian ◽  
Jason Mendes ◽  
Ravi Ranjan ◽  
Ganesh Adluru ◽  
...  

Abstract PurposeTo evaluate a myocardial perfusion acquisition that alternates 2D simultaneous multi-slice (SMS) and 3D stack-of-stars (SoS) acquisitions each heartbeat. MethodsA hybrid saturation recovery radial 2D SMS and a saturation recovery 3D SoS sequence were created for the quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF). Initial studies were done to study the effects of using only every other beat for the 2D SMS in two subjects, and for the 3D SoS in two subjects. Alternating heartbeat 2D SMS and 3D SoS were then performed in ten dog studies at rest, four dog studies at adenosine stress, and two human resting studies. 2D SMS acquisition acquired three slices and 3D SoS acquired six slices. An arterial input function (AIF) for 2D SMS was obtained using the first 24 rays. For 3D, the AIF was obtained in a 2D slice prior to each 3D SoS readout. Quantitative MBF analysis was performed for 2D SMS and 3D SoS separately, using a two-compartment model. ResultsAcquiring every-other-beat data resulted in 5-20% perfusion changes at rest for both 2D SMS and 3D SoS methods. For alternating acquisitions, 2D SMS and 3D SoS quantitative perfusion values were comparable for both the twelve rest studies (2D SMS: 0.68±0.15 vs 3D: 0.69±0.15 ml/g/min, p=0.85) and the four stress studies (2D SMS: 1.28±0.22 vs 3D: 1.30±0.24 ml/g/min, p=0.66).ConclusionEvery-other-beat acquisition changed estimated perfusion values relatively little for both sequences. 2D SMS and 3D SoS gave similar quantitative perfusion estimates when used in an alternating every-other-heartbeat acquisition. Such an approach allows consideration of more diverse perfusion acquisitions that could have complementary features, although testing in a cardiac disease population is needed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document