Xenios Milidonis1, Richard Crawley1, and Amedeo Chiribiri1
1School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
Synopsis
Myocardial perfusion quantification by cardiovascular
MR imaging has shown great promise in the detection of coronary artery disease.
However, the lack of true standardization of methods across centers hinders the
effective comparison and pooling of measurements. We sought to develop a novel
cardiac phantom mimicking dynamic contrast exchange between two myocardial compartments
and use it for the calibration of perfusion measured using three common quantification
methods. Without calibration, perfusion measurements differed significantly
between methods. Calibration led to accurate and non-significantly different
measurements, suggesting that it could be an effective and reliable approach
for the universal standardization of quantification methods.
Introduction
Measurement
of myocardial blood flow (MBF) by first-pass cardiovascular MR perfusion has
proven to be an effective and accurate marker of coronary artery disease.1-3
The usefulness of MBF quantification led to the development of a plethora of acquisition
and post-processing pipelines across centers, only a handful of which have
undergone independent validation. It is well acknowledged that the lack of
standardization of perfusion methods hinders the effective comparison of
absolute MBF measurements, and may render thresholds of disease and diagnostic
accuracy values non-generalizable.4 Rather than standardizing
quantification methods across centers, a more elegant and affordable solution
would be the use of a dedicated physical standard to calibrate MBF measurements.
The aim of this study was to present a physical standard for dynamic first-pass
perfusion imaging incorporating a novel synthetic multi-compartmental
myocardium. The reliability of the physical standard for perfusion calibration
was evaluated on a 3T system.Methods
Myocardium and phantom design
A
spatially lumped two-compartment system simulating contrast exchange between a
vascular and an extravascular compartment was designed and manufactured using
high-precision industrial 3D printing (Figure 1). The vascular compartment is a
set of parallel capillaries with 1440 sub-millimeter pores allowing diffusion
of the contrast agent into the surrounding extravascular compartment. The
vascular inlet and outlet resemble a vascular tree. This is an advanced version
of a previously described prototype that represented a single functional unit,5
and is designed for compatibility with a hardware phantom system (Zürich
MedTech AG, Zürich, Switzerland) (Figure 1c). The phantom is a torso-shaped box
made with machined acrylic comprising of a four-chamber heart, a pulmonary
volume, large thoracic vessels and coronary tubing for connecting the synthetic
myocardium. Flow through the various components is achieved with a gear pump
and flow controllers allowing independent control and monitoring of the cardiac
output and the outflow from each myocardial compartment. In this experiment,
only outflow from the vascular compartment was set so that the contrast
exchange is passive and bidirectional, in accordance with the two-compartment
exchange model (2CXM).6
Image acquisition
The
phantom was scanned on a 3T Philips Achieva system equipped with a 32-channel
cardiac phased-array coil (Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands). An
ECG-triggered saturation recovery spoiled gradient echo dual-sequence technique
was used (TR 2.2 ms, TE 1.0 ms, saturation delay 100 ms, flip angle 15°, acquired
resolution 2.6x2.6 mm2, slice thickness 8 mm),7 after
injection of a contrast bolus at 0.05 mmol/kg (Gadovist, Bayer AG, Leverkusen,
Germany). A low-resolution slice (parameters as above except saturation delay
23.5 ms, acquired resolution 2.6x5.3 mm2) was acquired at the level
of the proximal aorta to allow sampling of the arterial input function.8
Three repeated scans for each of four reference myocardial MBF values (1-4
mL/g/min) were acquired. Furthermore, phase contrast imaging with matching
spatial parameters was performed to assess the myocardium’s flow behavior.
Image and statistical analysis
Pixel-wise
MBF was estimated using tracer-kinetic modeling with the 2CXM, as well as the
common Fermi function-constrained deconvolution and model-independent
deconvolution using truncated singular value decomposition.6 2CXM
analysis was stabilized by fixing the volumes of the two compartments based on
their known values. Mean MBF was calibrated based on quadratic fitting of the
measured and reference values, and MBF before and after calibration was
compared between quantification methods using analysis of variance.Results
The
synthetic myocardium produces tissue enhancement curves characteristic to a
two-compartment perfusion model (Figure 2). At low MBF, the tracer arrival time
in the myocardium is increased and contrast clearance is prolonged due to the
slow exchange between the two compartments. In contrast, at high MBF the
contrast rapidly perfuses and traverses the myocardium. For each quantification
method, MBF increases with increasing reference values but with a nonlinear pattern (Figures 3, 4). MBF differed
significantly between methods without calibration (F(1.260, 13.859) = 79.598, p
< 0.001; all pairwise comparisons p < 0.001). Calibration led to a
linear relationship between measured and reference MBF and no difference
between methods (F(1.047, 11.522) = 0, p = 1).Discussion
While
phantoms for the validation of CMR first-pass perfusion have been proposed in
the past, this is the first solution that closely mimics the dynamics of
gadolinium-based contrast agents within the myocardial tissue, performed so in
a reliable and reproducible manner. The phantom was used for the assessment of
the accuracy of three common methods for the measurement of MBF, uncovering a
significant difference between measurements. The underestimation of MBF at
higher reference values by all methods can be partially attributed to
flow-related artifacts and signal saturation effects that may not be completely
recovered by the conversion of signal intensity to gadolinium concentration. Irrespective
of the measurement errors, phantom-based calibration alleviates the difference
in MBF between methods and restores its linearity. Due to the compatibility of our
phantom with other modalities, future work will focus on a multivendor and
multimodality calibration of first-pass perfusion and its clinical translation.Conclusion
We
developed a novel synthetic multi-compartmental phantom allowing reliable
calibration of MBF measured with different quantification methods. The proposed
solution could assist in the standardization of quantitative perfusion and the generalizability
of ischemia thresholds, allowing effective comparison of measurements and
eventually the clinical translation of the technique.Acknowledgements
XM
and AC were funded by the European Metrology Programme for Innovation and
Research (EMPIR) project 15HLT05 PerfusImaging, which is co-funded by the
European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and the EMPIR
Participating States. XM was funded by the British
Heart Foundation [TG/18/2/33768]. Further support was received by the
Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Medical Engineering [WT 203148/Z/16/Z] and the EPSRC
Centre for Doctoral Training in Medical Imaging [EP/L015226/1], as well as the
National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based
at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, the NIHR Cardiovascular MedTech
Co-operative at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College
London and supported by the NIHR Clinical Research Facility (CRF) at Guy’s and
St Thomas’. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily
those of the DoH, the NIHR, the NHS, the Wellcome Trust or the EPSRC.References
1.
Villa ADM, Corsinovi L, Ntalas I, et al. Importance of
operator training and rest perfusion on the diagnostic accuracy of stress perfusion
cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2018;20(1):74.
2.
Mordini FE, Haddad T, Hsu LY, et al. Diagnostic
accuracy of stress perfusion CMR in comparison with quantitative coronary
angiography: fully quantitative, semiquantitative, and qualitative assessment.
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7(1):14-22.
3.
Patel AR, Antkowiak PF, Nandalur KR, et al. Assessment
of advanced coronary artery disease: advantages of quantitative cardiac
magnetic resonance perfusion analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(7):561-569.
4.
Robinson AA, Salerno M, Kramer CM. Contemporary Issues
in Quantitative Myocardial Perfusion CMR Imaging. Current Cardiovascular
Imaging Reports. 2019;12(3):9.
5.
Milidonis X, Ludovica B, Schaeffter T, et al.
Validation of CMR perfusion using a synthetic multi-compartmental physical
standard. Bellevue, WA: SCMR 22nd Annual Scientific Sessions; 2019.
6.
Jerosch-Herold M. Quantification of myocardial
perfusion by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson.
2010;12:57.
7.
Sanchez-Gonzalez J, Fernandez-Jimenez R, Nothnagel ND,
et al. Optimization of dual-saturation single bolus acquisition for quantitative
cardiac perfusion and myocardial blood flow maps. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson.
2015;17:21.
8.
Franks R, Milidonis X, Schneider T, et al. Impact of
the Arterial Input Sampling Location on CMR First-Pass Myocardial Perfusion
Quantification. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 (e-pub).