| Literature DB >> 24308673 |
Robert Jablonowski, David Nordlund, Mikael Kanski, Joey Ubachs, Sasha Koul, Einar Heiberg, Henrik Engblom, David Erlinge, Håkan Arheden, Marcus Carlsson1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular-MR (CMR) is the gold standard for quantifying myocardial infarction using late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) technique. Both 2D- and 3D-LGE-sequences are used in clinical practise and in clinical and experimental studies for infarct quantification. Therefore the aim of this study was to investigate if image acquisitions with 2D- and 3D-LGE show the same infarct size in patients and ex vivo.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24308673 PMCID: PMC4029523 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2261-13-110
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord ISSN: 1471-2261 Impact factor: 2.298
Figure 1Patient LGE-imaging. Representative short axis LGE-images in one patient with myocardial scarring from base to apex (advancing from left to right). Top panels show 3D-IR images and bottom panels show 2D-PSIR images. (The green line denotes the epicardial border and the red line denotes the endocardial border. The infarct is delineated in yellow.)
Figure 2Patient infarct quantification. Agreement between 2D-PSIR and 3D-IR in absolute infarct volume in patients. (A) 2D-PSIR versus 3D-IR (r = 0.97) and the line of identity (B) The limits of agreement between the two LGE-techniques. The difference between the two methods was 0.47 ± 2.1 ml scar. Solid line = mean difference; dashed lines = ± 2 SD.
Figure 3Ex vivo imaging. Ex vivo short axis images in a representative pig heart from base (top) to apex (bottom). Left column shows high resolution T1 weighted images, middle column shows 2D-PSIR images and right column show 3D-IR images. The green line denotes the epicardial border and the red line denotes the endocardial border. The infarct is delineated in yellow. Note the difference in infarct size between the T1w-sequence and the IR-LGE sequences as showed by the white arrows in the top two rows.
Figure 4Ex vivo infarct quantification. (A) Agreement between the high resolution T1 weighted sequence compared to 2D-PSIR and 3D-IR ex vivo. The bias was 6.7 ± 3.0% for 2D-PSIR sequence and 7.3 ± 2.7% for the 3D-IR sequence (p < 0.05 for both). (B) Agreement between the 2D-PSIR and 3D-IR sequence ex vivo. Each black triangle represents one pig. The bias was 0.67 ± 2.4% and r = 0.93. Solid line = line of identity in both panel A and B.