PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of 3-dimensional (3D) steady-state free-precession (SSFP) magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) using nonselective radiofrequency excitation for imaging of pulmonary veins (PVs) without intravenous gadolinium chelate and to correlate the results with conventional contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty consecutive patients with history of atrial fibrillation underwent free-breathing respiratory navigator-gated electrocardiogram-triggered SSFP MRA without contrast administration and conventional high-resolution 3D CE-MRA of the thorax at 1.5 T. Two readers assessed both datasets for vascular definition (from 0, not visualized, to 3, excellent definition), artifacts, and ostial diameters. Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon, paired t test, and kappa coefficient. RESULTS: On SSFP MRA, readers 1 and 2 graded 96.4% (160/166) and 97% (161/166) of the segments as having diagnostic visibility and sharpness, respectively (k = 0.82). On CE-MRA datasets, all segments were graded as having diagnostic visibility and sharpness by both readers (k = 0.86). No significant difference existed for visibility and sharpness of pulmonary venous segments between the datasets for each reader (P[r] > 0.05). Reader 1 (2) identified 27 (28) and 35 (32) motion artifacts on SSFP and CE-MRA datasets, respectively. No significant difference was found to exist between ostial diameters on CE-MRA and SSFP datasets (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that 3D depiction of PVs without intravenous contrast is feasible with nonslice-selective SSFP MRA. This novel MRA technique may be used in certain patients with atrial fibrillation to assess the number and size of PV ostia draining to the left atrium prior to radiofrequency ablation.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of 3-dimensional (3D) steady-state free-precession (SSFP) magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) using nonselective radiofrequency excitation for imaging of pulmonary veins (PVs) without intravenous gadolinium chelate and to correlate the results with conventional contrast-enhanced MRA (CE-MRA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty consecutive patients with history of atrial fibrillation underwent free-breathing respiratory navigator-gated electrocardiogram-triggered SSFP MRA without contrast administration and conventional high-resolution 3D CE-MRA of the thorax at 1.5 T. Two readers assessed both datasets for vascular definition (from 0, not visualized, to 3, excellent definition), artifacts, and ostial diameters. Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon, paired t test, and kappa coefficient. RESULTS: On SSFP MRA, readers 1 and 2 graded 96.4% (160/166) and 97% (161/166) of the segments as having diagnostic visibility and sharpness, respectively (k = 0.82). On CE-MRA datasets, all segments were graded as having diagnostic visibility and sharpness by both readers (k = 0.86). No significant difference existed for visibility and sharpness of pulmonary venous segments between the datasets for each reader (P[r] > 0.05). Reader 1 (2) identified 27 (28) and 35 (32) motion artifacts on SSFP and CE-MRA datasets, respectively. No significant difference was found to exist between ostial diameters on CE-MRA and SSFP datasets (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that 3D depiction of PVs without intravenous contrast is feasible with nonslice-selective SSFP MRA. This novel MRA technique may be used in certain patients with atrial fibrillation to assess the number and size of PV ostia draining to the left atrium prior to radiofrequency ablation.
Authors: Peng Hu; Christian T Stoeck; Jouke Smink; Dana C Peters; Long Ngo; Beth Goddu; Kraig V Kissinger; Lois A Goepfert; Jonathan Chan; Thomas H Hauser; Neil M Rofsky; Warren J Manning; Reza Nezafat Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Mauricio Galizia; Rahul Renapurkar; Lourdes Prieto; Michael Bolen; Joseph Azok; Charles T Lau; Ahmed H El-Sherief Journal: Cardiovasc Diagn Ther Date: 2018-06
Authors: Zhaoyang Fan; Philip A Hodnett; Amir H Davarpanah; Timothy G Scanlon; John J Sheehan; John Varga; James C Carr; Debiao Li Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Mehmet Akçakaya; Peng Hu; Michael L Chuang; Thomas H Hauser; Long H Ngo; Warren J Manning; Vahid Tarokh; Reza Nezafat Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Johannes Siebermair; Eugene G Kholmovski; Douglas Sheffer; Joyce Schroeder; Leif Jensen; Mobin Kheirkhahan; Alex A Baher; Majd M Ibrahim; Theresa Reiter; Tienush Rassaf; Reza Wakili; Nassir F Marrouche; Christopher J McGann; Brent D Wilson Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-06-11 Impact factor: 3.629
Authors: John D Groarke; Alfonso H Waller; Tomas S Vita; Gregory F Michaud; Marcelo F Di Carli; Ron Blankstein; Raymond Y Kwong; Michael Steigner Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 5.364