ABSTRACT Purpose: Adenosine stress CMR is commonly used to assess myocardial ischaemia. Obtaining high quality images requires maximising signal to noise ratio (SNR) over a large double-oblique field of view (FOV) whilst minimising artefacts. A 32-channel surface coil may provide a higher SNR over a larger FOV compared to standard coils, possibly leading to improved image quality. Materials and Methods: 50 adenosine perfusion CMR scans were performed on a Philips Achieva CV 1.5T, with either a 5 or 32-channel coil (25 patients each) using standardised acquisition protocols. 3 short axis slices were acquired per cardiac cycle and the resulting cine images were scored by two blinded CMR specialists on a quality scale of 1 to 5. Phantom studies were performed using similar acquisition parameters and the SNR was calculated and compared across a range of acceleration factors. Results: The mean patient age was 62 ± 11 years and 50% of patients were male. The image quality scores were higher using the 32-channel coil (mean 3.8 ± 0.7 vs 3.2 ± 0.9 p = 0.002). The average phantom SNR was greater for the 32-element coil across the range of acceleration factors measured (103 vs 86 p = <0.001). Conclusions: The 32-channel coil produces significantly higher quality images and a higher SNR than the 5-channel coil in routine perfusion CMR.
Cite this paper
nullT. Burchell, R. Boubertakh, S. Mohiddin, M. Miquel, M. Westwood, A. Mathur and L. Davies, "Adenosine Stress Perfusion Cardiac MRI: Improving Image Quality Using a 32-Channel Surface Coil," Open Journal of Medical Imaging, Vol. 1 No. 2, 2011, pp. 21-25. doi: 10.4236/ojmi.2011.12004.
 N. Al-Saadi, E. Nagel, M. Gross, et al., “Noninvasive Detection of Myocardial Ischemia from Perfusion Reserve Based on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance,” Circulation, Vol. 101, No. 12, 2000, pp. 1379-1383.
T. Giang, D. Nanz, R. Coulden, et al., “Detection of Coronary Artery Disease by Magnetic Resonance Myocardial Perfusion Imaging with Various Contrast Medium Doses: First European Multi-Centre Experience,” European Heart Journal, Vol. 25, No. 18, 2004, pp. 1657-1665. doi:10.1016/j.ehj.2004.06.037
E. Nagel, C. Klein, I. Paetsch, et al., “Magnetic Resonance Perfusion Measurements for the Noninvasive Detection of Coronary Artery Disease,” Circulation, Vol. 108, No. 4, 2003, pp. 432-437.
J. Schwitter, D. Nanz, S. Kneifel, et al., “Assessment of Myocardial Perfusion in Coronary Artery Disease by Magnetic Resonance a Comparison with Positron Emission Tomography and Coronary Angiography,” Circulation, Vol. 103, No. 18, 2001, pp. 2230-2235.
N. Wilke, M. Jerosch-Herold, A. Zenovich and A. Stillman, “Magnetic Resonance First-Pass Myocardial Perfusion Imaging: Clinical Validation and Future Applications,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 10, No. 5, 1999, pp. 676-685.
C. Jahnke, E. Nagel, R. Gebker, et al., “Prognostic Value of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Stress Tests: Adenosine Stress Perfusion and Dobutamine Stress Wall Motion Imaging,” Circulation, Vol. 115, No. 13, 2007, pp. 1769-1776. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.652016
E. Di Bella, D. Parker and A. Sinusas, “On the Dark Rim Artifact in Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI Myocardial Perfusion Studies,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Vol. 54, No. 5, 2005, pp. 1295-1299.
T. Niendorf and D. Sodickson, “Highly Accelerated Cardiovascular MR Imaging Using Many Channel Technology: Concepts and Clinical Applications,” European Radiology, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2008, pp. 87-102.
 S. Plein, S. Kozerke, D. Suerder, et al., “High Spatial Resolution Myocardial Perfusion Cardiac Magnetic Resonance for the Detection of Coronary Artery Disease,” European Heart Journal, Vol. 29, No. 17, 2008, pp. 2148-2155.
P. Araoz, J. Glockner, K. McGee, et al., “3 Tesla MR Imaging Provides Improved Contrast in First-Pass Myocardial Perfusion Imaging over a Range of Gadolinium Doses,” Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Vol. 7, No. 3, 2005, pp. 559-564.
C. J. Hardy, H. E. Cline, R. O. Giaquinto, et al., “32-Element Receiver-Coil Array for Cardiac Imaging,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Vol. 55, No. 5, 2006, pp. 1142-1149. doi:10.1002/mrm.20870
Y. Zhu, C. J. Hardy, et al., “Highly Parallel Volumetric Imaging with a 32-Element RF Coil Array,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Vol. 52, No. 4, 2004, pp. 869- 877. doi:10.1002/mrm.20209
S. Reeder, B. Wintersperger, O. Dietrich, et al., “Practical Approaches to the Evaluation of Signal-to-Noise Ratio Performance with Parallel Imaging: Application with Cardiac Imaging and a 32-Channel Cardiac Coil,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Vol. 54, No. 3, 2005, pp. 748-754. doi:10.1002/mrm.20636
M. Ohliger and D. Sodickson, “An Introduction to Coil Array Design for Parallel MRI,” NMR in Biomedicine, Vol. 19, No. 3, 2006, pp. 300-315. doi:10.1002/nbm.1046
M. Fenchel, V. Deshpande, K. Nael, et al., “Cardiac Cine Imaging at 3 Tesla: Initial Experience With a 32-Element Body-Array Coil,” Investigative Radiology, Vol. 41, No. 8, 2006, pp. 601-608.
L. Shaw, D. Berman, D. Maron, et al., “Optimal Medical Therapy with or without Percutaneous Coronary Intervention to Reduce Ischemic Burden: Results from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) Trial Nuclear substudy,” Circulation, Vol. 117, No. 10, 2008, pp. 1283-1291. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.743963
P. Tonino, B. De Bruyne, N. Pijls, et al., “Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Guiding Percutaneous Coronary Intervention,” The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 360, No. 3, 2009, pp. 213-224.
 J Schwitter, C. Wacker, A. van Rossum, et al., “MR-IMPACT: Comparison of Perfusion-Cardiac Magnetic Resonance with Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography for the Detection of Coronary Artery Disease in a Multicentre, Multivendor, Randomized Trial,” European Heart Journal, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2008, pp. 480-489.