Absolute Versus Relative Myocardial Blood Flow by Dynamic CT Myocardial Perfusion Imaging in Patients With Anatomic Coronary Artery Disease

Adenosine stress computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (CTP) is an emerging non-invasive method for detecting myocardial ischaemia. Its value when compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR), a highly accurate index of ischaemia, is unknown. Our aim was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of CTP and its incremental value when used with computed tomography coronary angiography (CTA) for detecting ischaemia compared with FFR. Forty-two patients (126 vessel territories), who had at least one ≥50% angiographic stenosis on invasive angiography considered for non-urgent revascularization, were included and underwent FFR and CT assessment, including CTP, delayed contrast enhancement scan and CTA all acquired using 320-detector row CT, and prospective ECG gating. Fractional flow reserve was determined in 86 territories subtended by vessels with ≥50% stenosis upon visual assessment. Fractional flow reserve ≤0.8 was considered to indicate significant ischaemia. Computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging correctly identified 31/41 (76%) ischaemic territories and 38/45 (84%) non-ischaemic territories. Per-vessel territory sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values of CTP were 76, 84, 82, and 79%, respectively. The combination of a ≥50% stenosis on CTA and perfusion defect on CTP was 98% specific for ischaemia, while the presence of <50% stenosis on CTA and normal perfusion on CTP was 100% specific for exclusion of ischaemia. Mean radiation for CTP and combined CT was 5.3 and 11.3 mSv, respectively. Computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging is moderately accurate in identifying perfusion defects associated with ischaemia as assessed by FFR in patients considered for revascularization. In territories, where CTA and CTP are concordant, CTA/CTP is highly accurate in the detection and exclusion of ischaemia. This is achievable with acceptable radiation exposure using 320-detector row CT and prospective ECG gating.

To detail the principles of using model-based determination of regional myocardial blood flow (MBF) by computed tomography (CT) and demonstrate its in vivo applicability.

Background There has been increasing interest in quantitative myocardial blood flow (MBF) imaging over the last years and it is expected to become a routinely used technique in clinical practice. Positron emission tomography (PET) using [15O]H2O is the established gold standard for quantification of MBF in vivo. A fundamental issue when performing quantitative MBF imaging is to define the limits of MBF in a clinically suitable population. The aims of the present study were to determine the limits of MBF and to determine the relationship among coronary artery disease (CAD) risk factors, gender and MBF in a predominantly symptomatic patient cohort without significant CAD. Methods A total of 128 patients (mean age 54 ± 10 years, 50 men) with a low to intermediate pretest likelihood of CAD were referred for noninvasive evaluation of CAD using a hybrid PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) scanner. MBF was quantified with [15O]H2O at rest and during adenosine-induced hyperaemia. Obstructive CAD was excluded in these patients by means of invasive or CT-based coronary angiography. Results Global average baseline MBF values were 0.91 ± 0.34 and 1.09 ± 0.30  ml·min−1·g−1 (range 0.54–2.35  and 0.59–2.75 ml·min−1·g−1) in men and women, respectively (p < 0.01). However, no gender-dependent difference in baseline MBF was seen following correction for rate–pressure product (0.98 ± 0.45 and 1.09 ± 0.30 ml·min−1·g−1 in men and women, respectively; p = 0.08). Global average hyperaemic MBF values were 3.44 ± 1.20 ml·min−1·g−1 in the whole study population, and 2.90 ± 0.85 and 3.78 ± 1.27 ml·min−1·g−1 (range 1.52–5.22 and 1.72–8.15 ml·min−1·g−1) in men and women, respectively (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis identified male gender, age and body mass index as having an independently negative impact on hyperaemic MBF. Conclusion Gender, age and body mass index substantially influence reference values and should be corrected for when interpreting hyperaemic MBF values.