Literature DB >> 16795076

Determination of cardiac volumes and mass with FLASH and SSFP cine sequences at 1.5 vs. 3 Tesla: a validation study.

Lucy E Hudsmith1, Steffen E Petersen, Damian J Tyler, Jane M Francis, Adrian S H Cheng, Kieran Clarke, Joseph B Selvanayagam, Matthew D Robson, Stefan Neubauer.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare cardiac cine MR imaging using steady state free precession (SSFP) and fast low angle shot (FLASH) techniques at 1.5 and 3 T, and to establish their variabilities and reproducibilities for cardiac volume and mass determination in volunteers. To assess the feasibility of SSFP imaging in patients at 3 T and to determine comparability to volume data acquired at 1.5 T.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten healthy volunteers underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging using SSFP and segmented gradient-echo FLASH, using both a 1.5 and a 3 T MR system on the same day. Ten patients with impaired left ventricular (LV) function were also studied at both field strengths with SSFP.
RESULTS: For both SSFP and FLASH, field strength had no effect on the quantification of LV and right ventricular (RV) volumes, mass, or function (P > or = 0.05 for field strength for all parameters). At both 1.5 and 3 T, SSFP yielded smaller LV mass (e.g., at 3 T 109 +/- 30 g vs. 142 +/- 37 g; P = 0.011) and larger LV volume (e.g., at 3 T end-diastolic volume 149 +/- 37 mL vs. 133 +/- 31 mL at 5 T; P = 0.041) measurements than FLASH. In patients with reduced LV function, all volume and mass measurements were again similar for SSFP sequences at 1.5 vs. 3 T. In volunteers and patients, measurement variabilities for LV parameters were small for both field strength and sequences, ranging between 3.7% and 10.7% for mass.
CONCLUSION: Compared to 1.5 T, cardiac cine MR imaging at 3 T, using either FLASH or SSFP sequences, is feasible and highly reproducible. Field strength does not have an influence on quantification of cardiac volume or mass, but the systematic overestimation of LV mass and underestimation of LV volume by FLASH compared to SSFP is present at both 1.5 and 3 T. Normal values for cardiac volumes and mass established at 1.5 T can be applied to scans obtained at 3 T.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16795076     DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20638

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 1053-1807            Impact factor:   4.813


  32 in total

1.  Quantitative analysis of cardiac left ventricular variables obtained by MRI at 3 T: a pre- and post-contrast comparison.

Authors:  S Matthew; S J Gandy; R S Nicholas; S A Waugh; E A Crowe; R A Lerski; M H Dunn; J G Houston
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Cardiac chamber quantification using magnetic resonance imaging at 7 Tesla--a pilot study.

Authors:  Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; Tobias Frauenrath; Marcel Prothmann; Matthias A Dieringer; Fabian Hezel; Wolfgang Renz; Kerstin Kretschel; Thoralf Niendorf; Jeanette Schulz-Menger
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  [Cardiac functional analysis with MRI].

Authors:  T A Sandner; D Theisen; K U Bauner; M Picciolo; M F Reiser; B J Wintersperger
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Accuracy of accelerated cine MR imaging at 3 Tesla in longitudinal follow-up of cardiac function.

Authors:  Torleif A Sandner; Philip Houck; Val M Runge; Spencer Sincleair; Armin M Huber; Daniel Theisen; Maximilian F Reiser; Bernd J Wintersperger
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-05-08       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Usefulness of the left ventricular myocardial contraction fraction in healthy men and women to predict cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Authors:  Michael L Chuang; Philimon Gona; Carol J Salton; Susan B Yeon; Kraig V Kissinger; Susan J Blease; Daniel Levy; Christopher J O'Donnell; Warren J Manning
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 2.778

6.  Increased right ventricular Septomarginal trabeculation mass is a novel marker for pulmonary hypertension: comparison with ventricular mass index and right ventricular mass.

Authors:  Jens Vogel-Claussen; Monda L Shehata; Dirk Lossnitzer; Jan Skrok; Sukhminder Singh; Danielle Boyce; Noah Lechtzin; Reda E Girgis; Stephen C Mathai; Joao A Lima; David A Bluemke; Paul M Hassoun
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 6.016

Review 7.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for structural heart disease.

Authors:  Yiling Situ; Samuel C M Birch; Camila Moreyra; Cameron J Holloway
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2020-04

8.  7 Tesla (T) human cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging using FLASH and SSFP to assess cardiac function: validation against 1.5 T and 3 T.

Authors:  J J Suttie; L Delabarre; A Pitcher; P F van de Moortele; S Dass; C J Snyder; J M Francis; G J Metzger; P Weale; K Ugurbil; S Neubauer; M Robson; T Vaughan
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2011-07-19       Impact factor: 4.044

9.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging assessment of diastolic dysfunction in a population without heart disease: a gender-based study.

Authors:  Bruno Graça; Maria João Ferreira; Paulo Donato; Miguel Castelo-Branco; Filipe Caseiro-Alves
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-08-03       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Oral Coenzyme Q10 supplementation does not prevent cardiac alterations during a high altitude trek to everest base cAMP.

Authors:  Cameron J Holloway; Andrew J Murray; Kay Mitchell; Daniel S Martin; Andrew W Johnson; Lowri E Cochlin; Ion Codreanu; Sundeep Dhillon; George W Rodway; Tom Ashmore; Denny Z H Levett; Stefan Neubauer; Hugh E Montgomery; Michael P W Grocott; Kieran Clarke
Journal:  High Alt Med Biol       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.