Table 4.

Performance of proposed static MBF estimation compared to dynamic MBF estimation for approach using a single static acquisition, with shared baseline correction value for all rest and for all stress studies, and a double acquisition approach using a baseline acquisition and single contrast enhanced acquisition.

Single Acquisition	RMSE in SCDA MBF (ml/min/g)	Bias ± SD (ml/min/g)	Correlation Coefficient
Rest (N=27)	0.15 (0.16)	−0.01 ± 0.15 (−0.00 ± 0.16)	0.69 (0.69)
Stress (N=27)	1.57 (1.03)	0.44 ± 1.54 (0.31 ± 1.00)	0.47 (0.68)
All (rest & stress) (N=54)	1.17 (0.74)	0.21 ± 1.11 (0.15 ± 0.73)	0.61 (0.77)
Stress (excl. outlier, N=26)	0.65 (0.89)	0.17 ± 0.64 (0.21 ± 0.87)	0.75 (0.72)
All (rest & stress excl. outlier) (N=53)	0.47 (0.63)	0.08 ± 0.47 (0.10 ± 0.63)	0.83 (0.79)
Double Acquisition
Rest (N=27)	0.11 (0.11)	0.01 ± 0.02 (0.02 ± 0.11)	0.83 (0.84)
Stress (N=27)	0.48 (0.51)	−0.02 ± 0.49 (−0.04 ± 0.52)	0.80 (0.84)
All (rest & stress)	0.35 (0.37)	−0.00 ± 0.35 (−0.01 ± 0.37)	0.85 (0.86)

RMSE = root mean square error; SD = standard deviation; The values to the left of the parentheses are derived from preferred timing of contrast-enhanced myocardial acquisition (approx. input peak + 2 sec); values in parentheses are derived from a slightly later acquisition (approx. input peak + 4 sec).