Screening and/or follow-up with coronary magnetic resonance angiography: comparison between two-dimensional and three-dimensional techniques

Abstract

Purpose: This study was designed to compare the clinical characteristics of two-dimensional coronary magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with those of three-dimensional MR angiography and to describe the applicability of the two coronary MR angiographies to screening surveys and/or follow-up tests.Methods: Thirty-five patients (female: 9, male: 26) underwent conventional coronary angiography, and either two- or three-dimensional coronary MR angiography was performed with (in an informed series) and without (in a blinded series) knowledge of the results obtained by conventional coronary angiography.Results: Lack of images depicting the coronary lesions resulted in a low sensitivity of 56% with blinded two-dimensional coronary MR angiography. With conventional angiography, the specificity eventually reached 100%. The sensitivity (79%) using three-dimensional coronary MR angiography in the blinded series tended to be higher than that (56%) of blinded two-dimensional angiography (P=0.13), whereas, in the informed series three-dimensional angiography showed improvement neither in sensitivity (P=0.32) nor specificity (P=0.32).Conclusions: The capability of two-dimensional coronary MR angiography for accurate delineation of known lesions may indicate a role in follow-up tests for known lesions. Three-dimensional coronary MR angiography, on the other hand, may look promising for screening surveys; the present sensitivity and specificity are insufficient for clinical application.