Mismatch Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Invasive Physiology

A 74-year-old man returned to the clinic for follow-up of residual nonculprit lesions after reperfused acute inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Stress cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging demonstrated a severe perfusion defect in the anterior wall. Surprisingly, subsequent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Everaars, Henk, van Loon, Ramon B., Nijveldt, Robin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Imaging Vignette
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8301709/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34317355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccas.2020.02.022
_version_ 1783726733716881408
author Everaars, Henk
van Loon, Ramon B.
Nijveldt, Robin
author_facet Everaars, Henk
van Loon, Ramon B.
Nijveldt, Robin
author_sort Everaars, Henk
collection PubMed
description A 74-year-old man returned to the clinic for follow-up of residual nonculprit lesions after reperfused acute inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Stress cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging demonstrated a severe perfusion defect in the anterior wall. Surprisingly, subsequent invasive assessment did not reveal hemodynamically significant obstruction in the nonculprit vessels. (Level of Difficulty: Beginners.)
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8301709
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83017092021-07-26 Mismatch Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Invasive Physiology Everaars, Henk van Loon, Ramon B. Nijveldt, Robin JACC Case Rep Imaging Vignette A 74-year-old man returned to the clinic for follow-up of residual nonculprit lesions after reperfused acute inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Stress cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging demonstrated a severe perfusion defect in the anterior wall. Surprisingly, subsequent invasive assessment did not reveal hemodynamically significant obstruction in the nonculprit vessels. (Level of Difficulty: Beginners.) Elsevier 2020-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8301709/ /pubmed/34317355 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccas.2020.02.022 Text en © 2020 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Imaging Vignette
Everaars, Henk
van Loon, Ramon B.
Nijveldt, Robin
Mismatch Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Invasive Physiology
title Mismatch Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Invasive Physiology
title_full Mismatch Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Invasive Physiology
title_fullStr Mismatch Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Invasive Physiology
title_full_unstemmed Mismatch Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Invasive Physiology
title_short Mismatch Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Invasive Physiology
title_sort mismatch between cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and invasive physiology
topic Imaging Vignette
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8301709/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34317355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccas.2020.02.022
work_keys_str_mv AT everaarshenk mismatchbetweencardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandinvasivephysiology
AT vanloonramonb mismatchbetweencardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandinvasivephysiology
AT nijveldtrobin mismatchbetweencardiacmagneticresonanceimagingandinvasivephysiology

Ejemplares similares