Article Figures & Data
Figures
- FIGURE 1.
American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology 17-segment map.
- FIGURE 2.
Segmentation and chamber identification. LV myocardial segments are identified (top row), as well as right ventricular (RV) and LV blood pools (bottom row).
- FIGURE 3.
Polar map display of MFRs. Values of segments 2 and 3 are markedly reduced compared with values of all other segments.
- FIGURE 4.
Stress (top) and rest (bottom) horizontal long-axis sections from septum (left) to lateral wall (right) for patient with essentially normal perfusion, all summed perfusion scores equal to 0, and normal function (ejection fraction, 70%). Respective flow inhomogeneities (ratio of SD to mean) were 15%, 23%, and 15% for rest MBF, stress MBF, and MFR when only segments 4–17 were included but increased to 31%, 34%, and 22% when all 17 segments were included.
- FIGURE 5.
82Rb polar perfusion maps for stress (left) and rest (right) for the patient of Figure 4 display markedly reduced perfusion in basal–septal territories.
- FIGURE 6.
Bland–Altman plot of differences vs. mean values for 17-segment stress MBF (MBFstress17) and 14-segment stress MBF (MBFstress14), in units of mL/g/min.
Tables
- TABLE 1
Comparison of MBF Parameters Obtained by Including All 17 LV Segments vs. Only Segments 4–17
Parameter Segments 1–17 Segments 4–17 Rest MBF (mL/g/min) 0.78 ± 0.50* 0.85 ± 0.54 Stress MBF (mL/g/min) 1.50 ± 0.88* 1.67 ± 0.96 MFR 2.11 ± 1.00* 2.16 ± 1.00 Rest CVR (mm Hg/mL/g/min) 159 ± 86* 147 ± 81 Stress CVR (mm Hg/mL/g/min) 85 ± 52* 76 ± 48 %SD of rest MBF 39% ± 10%* 31% ± 10% %SD of stress MBF 42% ± 12%* 32% ± 11% %SD of MFR 28% ± 18%* 25% ± 10% ↵* Paired t test P < 0.0001 vs. segments 4–17.
Parameter Mean difference Maximum difference Mean % difference Maximum % difference Rest MBF (mL/g/min) 0.06 ± 0.05 0.24 8.2% ± 4.2% 16.8% Stress MBF (mL/g/min) 0.14 ± 0.10 0.54 9.3% ± 4.5% 16.3% MFR 0.02 ± 0.07 0.26 1.1% ± 3.1% 15.0% Rest CVR (mm Hg/mL/g/min) −12.7 ± 8.7 −43.9 −8.5% ± 4.2% −17.5% Stress CVR (mm Hg/mL/g/min) −8.2 ± 5.9 −27.8 −10.5% ± 5.2% −18.8% %SD of rest MBF −7.6% ± 5.1% −22.0% — — %SD of stress MBF −9.4% ± 5.4% −20.0% — — %SD of MFR −2.6% ± 14.1% 12.0% — — - TABLE 3
Comparison of MBF Parameters for Patients Divided into Groups for Whom 14-Segment MFR Was Below or Above Median
MFR < 1.95 MFR ≥ 1.95 Parameter Segments 1–17 Segments 4–17 Segments 1–17 Segments 4–17 Rest MBF (mL/g/min) 0.91 ± 0.58* 0.98 ± 0.61 0.67 ± 0.40* 0.72 ± 0.42 Stress MBF (mL/g/min) 1.23 ± 0.78* 1.35 ± 0.84 1.81 ± 0.92* 1.98 ± 0.97 MFR 1.40 ± 0.34* 1.42 ± 0.35 2.86 ± 0.94* 2.90 ± 0.91 Rest CVR (mm Hg/mL/g/min) 136 ± 79* 125 ± 73 182 ± 89* 167 ± 83 Stress CVR (mm Hg/mL/g/min) 103 ± 60* 94 ± 56 64 ± 31* 58 ± 28 %SD of rest MBF 39% ± 10%* 31% ± 10% 38% ± 9%* 30% ± 9% %SD of stress MBF 43% ± 12%* 34% ± 13% 38% ± 9%* 30% ± 9% %SD of MFR 26% ± 11% 30% ± 23% 24% ± 9% 26% ± 9% ↵* P < 0.0001 vs. segments 4–17.
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.