ArticlePloS one2016
Quantitative Perfusion Analysis of First-Pass Contrast Enhancement Kinetics: Application to MRI of Myocardial Perfusion in Coronary Artery Disease.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sub-segmental quantification of single (stress)-pass perfusion CMR improves the diagnostic accuracy for detection of obstructive coronary artery disease.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2020Observational
- Automatic in-line quantitative myocardial perfusion mapping: Processing algorithm and implementation.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2020Article
- Estimating extraction fraction and blood flow by combining first-pass myocardial perfusion and T1 mapping results.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2017Article
- Myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance: optimized dual sequence and reconstruction for quantification.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePerfusion analysis from first-pass contrast enhancement kinetics requires modeling tissue contrast exchange. This study presents a new approach for numerical implementation of the tissue homogeneity model, incorporating flexible distance steps along the capillary (NTHf).
methodsThe proposed NTHf model considers contrast exchange in fluid packets flowing along the capillary, incorporating flexible distance steps, thus allowing more efficient and stable calculations of the transit of tracer through the tissue. We prospectively studied 8 patients (62 ± 13 years old) with suspected CAD, who underwent first-pass perfusion CMR imaging at rest and stress prior to angiography. Myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial perfusion reserve index (MPRI) were estimated using both the NTHf and the conventional adiabatic approximation of the TH models. Coronary artery lesions detected at angiography were clinically assigned to one of three categories of stenosis severity ('insignificant', 'mild to moderate' and 'severe') and related to corresponding myocardial territories.
resultsThe mean MBF (ml/g/min) at rest/stress and MPRI were 0.80 ± 0.33/1.25 ± 0.45 and 1.68 ± 0.54 in the insignificant regions, 0.74 ± 0.21/1.09 ± 0.28 and 1.54 ± 0.46 in the mild to moderate regions, and 0.79 ± 0.28/0.63 ± 0.34 and 0.85 ± 0.48 in the severe regions, respectively. The correlation coefficients of MBFs at rest/stress and MPRI between the NTHf and AATH models were r = 0.97/0.93 and r = 0.91, respectively.
conclusionsThe proposed NTHf model allows efficient quantitative analysis of the transit of tracer through tissue, particularly at higher flow. Results of initial application to MRI of myocardial perfusion in CAD are encouraging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.