I always wonder why CMR perfusion is not embraced more quickly by the cardiologists. CCT is newer but has taken the cardiology field so rapidly, providing sometimes much less significant information than CMR. On the many discussions on the topic, I can only think the main reason is simplicity. CCT (as well as SPECT) is so obvious and the pictures presented so clearly, despite the fact that they may not correlate to physiological findings as well as CMR. Why don’t the vendors and software providers develop new tools so we can present our data better? Try to explain a subtle perfusion defect in cine mode to a clinician and you will understand what I mean. Bring on the colorful donuts to CMR!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment