Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Coronary Arteries

  • Vassilios VassiliouEmail author
  • James H. F. Rudd
  • Rene Botnar
  • Gerald Greil


Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is a safe, noninvasive, and radiation-free modality that provides clinically important information about patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), including cardiac anatomy, function, viability, and perfusion. However, the application of CMR for performing coronary angiography remains challenging as cardiac and respiratory motion need to be accounted for in small and often tortuous coronary artery vessels. In the last two decades novel techniques have been developed to enable and optimize the imaging of coronary artery lumen and vessel wall using CMR. Currently, these techniques are used clinically for a range of specific cardiac applications whilst the widespread use in patients with coronary artery disease is still under investigation. This chapter focuses on the use of CMR for the imaging of coronary arteries in patients with suspected or known CAD or other coronary anomalies.


Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Kawasaki Disease Late Gadolinium Enhancement Compute Tomography Coronary Angiography Significant Coronary Artery Disease 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Perk J, De Backer G, Gohlke H, et al. The fifth joint task force of the European Society of Cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:1635–701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Global status report on non-communicable diseases 2010. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2011Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mathers CD, Loncar D. Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS Med. 2006;3, e442.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heidenreich PA, Trogdon JG, Khavjou OA, et al. Forecasting the future of cardiovascular disease in the United States: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011;123:933–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chiribiri A, Ishida M, Nagel E, Botnar RM. Coronary imaging with cardiovascular magnetic resonance: current state of the art. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2011;54:240–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:886–95.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bashore TM, Balter S, Barac A, et al. 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions expert consensus document on cardiac catheterization laboratory standards update: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus documents developed in collaboration with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and Society for Vascular Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:2221–305.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Efstathopoulos EP, Pantos I, Thalassinou S, Argentos S, Kelekis NL, Zograpfos T, Panayiotakis G, Katritsis DG. Patients radiation doses in Cardiac Computed Tomography: comparison of published results with prospective and retrospective acquisition. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2011;148:83–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huda W, Schoepf UJ, Abro JA, Mah E, Costello P. Radiation-related cancer risk in a clinical patient population undergoing cardiac CT. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:159–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greenwood JP, Maredia N, Younger JF, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography for diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CE-MARC): a prospective trial. Lancet. 2012;379:453–60.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nissen SE, Tuzcu EM, Schoenhagen P, Brown BG, Ganz P, Vogel RA, Crowe T, Howard G, Cooper CJ, Brodie B, Grines CL, DeMaria AN. REVERSAL Investigators. Effect of intensive compared with moderate lipid-lowering therapy on progression of coronary atherosclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;291:1071–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Botnar RM, Stuber M, Danias PG, Kissinger KV, Manning WJ. Improved coronary artery definition with T2-weighted, free-breathing, three-dimensional coronary MRA. Circulation. 1999;99:3139–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim WY, Danias PG, Stuber M, et al. Coronary magnetic resonance angiography for the detection of coronary stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1863–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paulin S, von Schulthess GK, Fossel E, Krayenbuehl HP. MR imaging of the aortic root and proximal coronary arteries. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1987;148:665–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Edelman RR, Manning WJ, Burstein D, Paulin S. Coronary arteries: breath-hold MR angiography. Radiology. 1991;181:641–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uribe S, Hussain T, Valverde I, et al. Congenital heart disease in children: coronary MR angiography during systole and diastole with dual cardiac phase whole-heart imaging. Radiology. 2011;260:232–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim WY, Stuber M, Kissinger KV, et al. Impact of bulk cardiac motion on right coronary MR angiography and vessel wall imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;14:383–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jahnke C, Paetsch I, Nehrke K, et al. A new approach for rapid assessment of the cardiac rest period for coronary MRA. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2005;7:395–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tangcharoen T, Jahnke C, Koehler U, et al. Impact of heart rate variability in patients with normal sinus rhythm on image quality in coronary magnetic angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;28:74–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ehman RL, Felmlee JP. Adaptive technique for high-definition MR imaging of moving structures. Radiology. 1989;173:255–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang Y, Riederer SJ, Ehman RL. Respiratory motion of the heart: kinematics and the implications for the spatial resolution in coronary imaging. Magn Reson Med. 1995;33:713–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Danias PG, Stuber M, Botnar RM, et al. Relationship between motion of coronary arteries and diaphragm during free breathing: lessons from real-time MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172:1061–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nagel E, Bornstedt A, Schnackenburg B, et al. Optimization of realtime adaptive navigator correction for 3D magnetic resonance coronary angiography. Magn Reson Med. 1999;42:408–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huber S, Bornstedt A, Schnackenburg B, et al. The impact of different positions and thoracial restrains on respiratory induced cardiac motion. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2006;8:483–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sakuma H, Ichikawa Y, Chino S, et al. Detection of coronary artery stenosis with whole-heart coronary magnetic resonance angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:1946–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Edelman RR, Manning WJ, Burstein D, Paulin S. Coronary arteries: breath-hold MR angiography. Radiology. 1991;181:641–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Manning WJ, Li W, Boyle NG, Edelman RR. Fat-suppressed breath-hold magnetic resonance coronary angiography. Circulation. 1993;87:94–104.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Li D, Paschal CB, Haacke EM, Adler LP. Coronary arteries: three-dimensional MR imaging with fat saturation and magnetization transfer contrast. Radiology. 1993;187:401–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brittain JH, Hu BS, Wright GA, Meyer CH, Macovski A, Nishimura DG. Coronary angiography with magnetization-prepared t2 contrast. Magn Reson Med. 1995;33:689–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Regenfus M, Ropers D, Achenbach S, Kessler W, Laub G, Daniel WG, et al. Noninvasive detection of coronary artery stenosis using contrast-enhanced three-dimensional breath-hold magnetic resonance coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:44–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Makowski MR, Wiethoff AJ, Uribe S, et al. Congenital heart disease: cardiovascular MR imaging by using an intravascular blood pool contrast agent. Radiology. 2011;260:680–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Laurent S, Elst LV, Muller RN. Comparative study of the physicochemical properties of six clinical low molecular weight gadolinium contrast agents. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2006;1:128–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Goldfarb JW, Edelman RR. Coronary arteries: breath-hold, gadolinium-enhanced, three-dimensional MR angiography. Radiology. 1998;206:830–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stuber M, Botnar RM, Danias PG, et al. Contrast agent–enhanced, free-breathing, three-dimensional coronary magnetic resonance angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10:790–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hussain T, Fenton M, Peel SA, et al. Detection and grading of coronary allograft vasculopathy in children with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the coronary vessel wall. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;8:66–70.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Greil GF, Seeger A, Miller S, et al. Coronary magnetic resonance angiography and vessel wall imaging in children with Kawasaki disease. Pediatr Radiol. 2007;37:666–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Greil GF, Stuber M, Botnar RM, et al. Coronary magnetic resonance angiography in adolescents and young adults with Kawasaki disease. Circulation. 2002;105:908–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mavrogeni S, Papadopoulos G, Hussain T, Chiribiri A, Botnar R, Greil GF. The emerging role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the evaluation of Kawasaki disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;29(8):1787–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Chiribiri A, Botnar RM, Nagel E. Magnetic resonance angiography: where are we today? Curr Cardiol Rep. 2013;15:328.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tangcharoen T, Bell A, Hegde S, et al. Detection of coronary artery anomalies in infants and young children with congenital heart disease by using MR imaging. Radiology. 2011;259:240–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Galjee MA, van Rossum AC, Doesburg T, et al. Value of magnetic resonance imaging in assessing patency and function of coronary artery bypass grafts. An angiographically controlled study. Circulation. 1996;93:660–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Vrachliotis TG, Bis KG, Aliabadi D, et al. Contrast-enhanced breath-hold MR angiography for evaluating patency of coronary artery bypass grafts. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168:1073–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rubinstein RI, Askenase AD, Thickman D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate patency of aortocoronary bypass grafts. Circulation. 1987;76:786–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Assomull RG, Shakespeare C, Kalra PR, et al. Role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance as a gatekeeper to invasive coronary angiography in patients presenting with heart failure of unknown etiology. Circulation. 2011;124:1351–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vassilios Vassiliou
    • 1
    Email author
  • James H. F. Rudd
    • 2
  • Rene Botnar
    • 3
  • Gerald Greil
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.CMR Unit and Biomedical Research UnitRoyal Brompton Hospital and Imperial CollegeLondonUK
  2. 2.Cambridge University and Honorary Consultant Cardiologist, Addenbrooke’s HospitalCambridgeUK
  3. 3.Division of Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, The Rayne InstituteKing’s College London, St Thomas’ HospitalLondonUK
  4. 4.Congenital Cardiac MRI Imaging ServiceS. Thomas’ Hospital/Evelina Children’s HospitalLondonUK

Personalised recommendations