Comparative Study 3.0T MR Coronary Angiography And Coronary CT Angiography

Part I:Contrast-enhanced3.0T MR Imaging of Coronary Arteries: Comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadoxetic acidObjective:To compare the image quality and display of coronary artery segments between intravascular contrast agents gadobenate dimeglumine and extravascular contrast agents gadoxeti-c acid at3.0T contrast-enhanced whole-heart coronary magnetic resonance angiography (CE CMRA) prospectively.Methods:thirty patients which complied with the requiements were randomly divided into Group A (15cases,with intravascular contrast agents gadobenate dimegluine) Group B(15cases, with the blood vessels contrast agents gadoxetic acid).All cases were underwent CE CMRA at3.0T MRI scanner.Statistical analysis was performed in signal-to-noise ratio(SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio(CNR) and display of coronary artery segments.Results:CE-CMRA was performed_successfully in30cases.The SNR and CNR in Group A was157.48±64.21and (139.77±63.56,respectively.They were71.56±33.21and50.75±29.71in group B, respectively. The difference was significant(P=0.008, P=0.005). The differenc-e was also found in the display of coronary artery segments between two groups, especially, between the the distal of the circumflex segments(P=0.027).Conclusion:gadobenate dimeglumine can provided better image quality than gadoxetic acid in CE CMRA.Part II:Quantitative Analysis of3Tesla Contrast Enhanced Whole Heart Coronary MR Angiography:Comparison of Coronary Computer Tomography AngiographyObjective:The purpose of this research was to compare3tesla contrast enhanced whole heart coronary MR angiography(CE-CMRA) visualizing the lengths、the average diameter and image quality of the main coronary arterial branches versus64-slice CT coronary angiography (CTCA).Methods:twenty-two consecutive patients underwent3.0T MR and128-slice CT, and the original images were reconstructed. The quality of CE-CM RA and CCTA was was evaluated and lengths、the average diameter of the main coronary arterial branches were measured.Results:There was no significant difference in the average diameter and a majority of the len-gths of the main coronary arterial branches between two methods, however,CCTA is better than CE-CMRA in visualizing the lengths of LCX (P=0.006). There were significant difference in the imaging quality of distal of right coronary artery、distal of left anterior descending and distal of left circumflex(P=0.045、0.008、0.018). Conclusion:Although CCTA is superior to CE-CMRA in the imaging quality of distal of ma-in coronary arterial branches, the prior and middle segments of coronary artery principal branch-es were presented well. And CE-CMRA also can be utilized as an alter imaging modality in pati-ents who were not suitable in CCTA examing.Part III:Diagnostic Value of3Tesla Contrast Enhanced Whole Heart Coronary MR Angiography in Coronary Artery Disease:a comparative analysis with Coronary Computer Tomography AngiographyObjective:The purpose of this research was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of128-slice CT coronary angiography(CTCA) and3tesla contrast enhanced whole heart coronary MR angiography(CE CMRA) versus coronary angiography(CAG).Methods:twenty-two consecutive patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease prospectively underwent3.0T MR and128-slice CT.The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of CCTA and CE-CEMA in detecting stenosis were evaluated using X-ray angiography as the reference. Kappa consistency test was used to evaluate the consistency of two methods.Results:The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of evaluating significant stenosis with CTCA/CE-CMRA was94.1%/82.4%、97.8%/88.9%、and97.5%/88.4%. The consistency for displaying the stenosis with CCTA and CE-CMRA was good(Kappa=o.491,p<0.05).Conclusion:CCTA is better than CE-CMRA in the evaluation of coronary artery stenosis. CE-CMRA has a better visulation than CCTA of heavy coronary calcification.