Objective: Calcification is a principal problem in noninvasive coronary angiography (CA) performed with multislice computed tomography (MSCT). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) supposedly neglects calcium. We compared both modalities.
Methods: Sixty-eight patients admitted for CA underwent MSCT- and MRI-based noninvasive CA the day before. Stenosis detection (>or=50%) was visually performed and validated by quantitative CA.
Results: The patient-based overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 96.2%, 95.2%, 92.6%, and 97.6% for MSCT versus 69.2%, 64.3, 54.5%, 64.3%, and 77.1% for MRI, respectively. The segment-based overall results were 74.7%, 97.8%, 75.7%, and 97.6% for MSCT versus 40%, 93.8%, 37.5%, and 94.4% for MRI, respectively. Investigating the impact of coronary calcifications in the patient group with a volume score of 300 microL or greater resulted in 100%, 80%, 92.3%, and 100% for MSCT versus 70.8%, 86.7%, 89.5%, and 65% for MRI, respectively. The segment group with considerable hardening artifacts resulted in 85.3%, 83.9%, 76.3%, and 90.4% for MSCT versus 52.9%, 92.9%, 81.8%, and 76.5% for MRI, respectively.
Conclusions: There are no major advantages of MRI in cases of advanced coronary calcification.