PURPOSE: To determine whether systematic differences were present between myocardial R2* values obtained with two different decay models: truncation and exponential + constant (Exp-C). METHODS: Single-center cohorts were used to compare black and bright blood sequences separately, and a multicenter cohort of mixed bright and black blood studies was used to assess the generalizability. Truncated exponential estimates were calculated with CMRtools, which uses a single region of interest (ROI) method. Exp-C estimates were calculated using a pixelwise approach. RESULTS: No differences could be distinguished based upon whether a white or black blood sequence was examined. The two fitting algorithms yielded similar R2* values, with R-squared values exceeding 0.997 and a coefficient of variation of 3% to 4%. Results using the pixelwise method yielded a small systematic bias (∼3%) that became apparent in patients with severe iron deposition. This disparity disappeared when Exp-C fitting was used on a single ROI, suggesting that the use of pixelwise mapping was responsible for the bias. In the multicenter cohort, the strong agreement between the two fitting approaches was reconfirmed. CONCLUSION: Cardiac R2* values are independent of the signal model used for its calculation over clinically relevant ranges. Clinicians can compare results among centers using these disparate approaches with confidence.
PURPOSE: To determine whether systematic differences were present between myocardial R2* values obtained with two different decay models: truncation and exponential + constant (Exp-C). METHODS: Single-center cohorts were used to compare black and bright blood sequences separately, and a multicenter cohort of mixed bright and black blood studies was used to assess the generalizability. Truncated exponential estimates were calculated with CMRtools, which uses a single region of interest (ROI) method. Exp-C estimates were calculated using a pixelwise approach. RESULTS: No differences could be distinguished based upon whether a white or black blood sequence was examined. The two fitting algorithms yielded similar R2* values, with R-squared values exceeding 0.997 and a coefficient of variation of 3% to 4%. Results using the pixelwise method yielded a small systematic bias (∼3%) that became apparent in patients with severe iron deposition. This disparity disappeared when Exp-C fitting was used on a single ROI, suggesting that the use of pixelwise mapping was responsible for the bias. In the multicenter cohort, the strong agreement between the two fitting approaches was reconfirmed. CONCLUSION: Cardiac R2* values are independent of the signal model used for its calculation over clinically relevant ranges. Clinicians can compare results among centers using these disparate approaches with confidence.
Authors: L J Anderson; S Holden; B Davis; E Prescott; C C Charrier; N H Bunce; D N Firmin; B Wonke; J Porter; J M Walker; D J Pennell Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Nilesh R Ghugre; Cathleen M Enriquez; Thomas D Coates; Marvin D Nelson; John C Wood Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Nilesh R Ghugre; Cathleen M Enriquez; Ignacio Gonzalez; Marvin D Nelson; Thomas D Coates; John C Wood Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: John C Wood; Cathleen Enriquez; Nilesh Ghugre; Maya Otto-Duessel; Michelle Aguilar; Marvin D Nelson; Rex Moats; Thomas D Coates Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2005 Impact factor: 5.691
Authors: Sebastian Bidhult; Christos G Xanthis; Love Lindau Liljekvist; Gerald Greil; Eike Nagel; Anthony H Aletras; Einar Heiberg; Erik Hedström Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2015-05-22 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Pandji Triadyaksa; Niek H J Prakken; Jelle Overbosch; Robin B Peters; J Martijn van Swieten; Matthijs Oudkerk; Paul E Sijens Journal: MAGMA Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 2.310