RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cardiac MR stress perfusion remains a qualitative technique in clinical practice due to technical and postprocessing challenges. However, automated inline perfusion mapping now permits myocardial blood flow (MBF, ml/g/min) quantification on-the-fly without user input. PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic performance of this novel technique in detecting occlusive coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients scheduled to undergo coronary angiography. STUDY TYPE: Prospective, observational. SUBJECTS: Fifty patients with suspected CAD and 24 healthy volunteers. FIELD STRENGTH: 1.5T. SEQUENCE: "Dual" sequence multislice 2D saturation recovery. ASSESSMENT: All patients underwent cardiac MR with perfusion mapping and invasive coronary angiography; the healthy volunteers had MR with perfusion mapping alone. STATISTICAL TESTS: Comparison between numerical variables was performed using an independent t-test. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were generated for transmyocardial, endocardial stress MBF, and myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR, the stress:rest MBF ratio) to diagnose severe (>70%) stenoses as measured by 3D quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). ROC curves were compared by the method of DeLong et al. RESULTS: Compared with volunteers, patients had lower stress MBF and MPR even in vessels with <50% stenosis (2.00 vs. 3.08 ml/g/min, respectively). As stenosis severity increased (<50%, 50-70%, >70%), MBF and MPR decreased. To diagnose occlusive (>70%) CAD, endocardial and transmyocardial stress MBF were superior to MPR (area under the curve 0.92 [95% CI 0.86-0.97] vs. 0.90 [95% CI 0.84-0.95] and 0.80 [95% CI 0.72-0.87], respectively). An endocardial threshold of 1.31 ml/g/min provided a per-coronary artery sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 90%, 82%, 50%, and 98%, with a per-patient diagnostic performance of 100%, 66%, 57%, and 100%, respectively. DATA CONCLUSION: Perfusion mapping can diagnose occlusive CAD with high accuracy and, in particular, high sensitivity and NPV make it a potential "rule-out" test. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy Stage: 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:756-762.
