MR-IMPACT II: Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Myocardial Perfusion Assessment in Coronary artery disease Trial: perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance vs. single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparative multicentre, multivendor trial.

Détails

Ressource 1Télécharger: REF.pdf (287.47 [Ko])
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
Licence: Non spécifiée
It was possible to publish this article open access thanks to a Swiss National Licence with the publisher.
ID Serval
serval:BIB_9A54D6157BF3
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Titre
MR-IMPACT II: Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Myocardial Perfusion Assessment in Coronary artery disease Trial: perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance vs. single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparative multicentre, multivendor trial.
Périodique
European Heart Journal
Auteur⸱e⸱s
Schwitter J., Wacker C.M., Wilke N., Al-Saadi N., Sauer E., Huettle K., Schönberg S.O., Luchner A., Strohm O., Ahlstrom H., Dill T., Hoebel N., Simor T.
Collaborateur⸱rice⸱s
MR-IMPACT Investigators
ISSN
1522-9645 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0195-668X
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2013
Volume
34
Numéro
10
Pages
775-781
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Journal ArticlePublication Status: ppublish. PDF type: CLINICAL RESEARCH
Résumé
Aims Perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) has emerged as a potential alternative to single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) to assess myocardial ischaemia non-invasively. The goal was to compare the diagnostic performance of perfusion-CMR and SPECT for the detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) using conventional X-ray coronary angiography (CXA) as the reference standard. Methods and results In this multivendor trial, 533 patients, eligible for CXA or SPECT, were enrolled in 33 centres (USA and Europe) with 515 patients receiving MR contrast medium. Single-photon emission computed tomography and CXA were performed within 4 weeks before or after CMR in all patients. The prevalence of CAD in the sample was 49%. Drop-out rates for CMR and SPECT were 5.6 and 3.7%, respectively (P = 0.21). The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of CMR vs. SPECT for both sensitivity and specificity for the detection of CAD. Readers were blinded vs. clinical data, CXA, and imaging results. As a secondary endpoint, the safety profile of the CMR examination was evaluated. For CMR and SPECT, the sensitivity scores were 0.67 and 0.59, respectively, with the lower confidence level for the difference of +0.02, indicating superiority of CMR over SPECT. The specificity scores for CMR and SPECT were 0.61 and 0.72, respectively (lower confidence level for the difference: -0.17), indicating inferiority of CMR vs. SPECT. No severe adverse events occurred in the 515 patients. Conclusion In this large multicentre, multivendor study, the sensitivity of perfusion-CMR to detect CAD was superior to SPECT, while its specificity was inferior to SPECT. Cardiac magnetic resonance is a safe alternative to SPECT to detect perfusion deficits in CAD.
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Oui
Création de la notice
12/04/2013 17:36
Dernière modification de la notice
14/02/2022 7:56
Données d'usage