Anvesha Singh1, Mark A Horsfield2, Soliana Bekele3, Jamal N Khan2, Andreas Greiser4, Gerry P McCann2. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester and the NIHR Leicester Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9QP, UK as707@le.ac.uk. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester and the NIHR Leicester Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9QP, UK. 3. University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK. 4. Siemens AG, Healthcare Sector, Erlangen, Germany.
Abstract
AIMS: (i) To establish the test-retest reproducibility of myocardial T1 and extracellular volume (ECV) fraction measurement in asymptomatic patients with moderate-severe aortic stenosis (AS), (ii) to compare reproducibility using motion-corrected (MOCO) parametric T1 maps for analysis vs. full MOLLI series of images, and (iii) to compare T1 and ECV between patients and age-matched controls. METHODS AND RESULTS: 3 T cardiac MRI was performed twice on 10 patients (median interval 7 days) to assess reproducibility. An additional 40 patients and 22 asymptomatic controls underwent a single MRI. Native T1 and ECV were calculated by outlining the myocardium on T1 maps generated inline, and using an offline T1 fit on the MOCO multiple inversion-time raw image series, in the reproducibility cohort (n = 10). Reproducibility was excellent using the inline T1 maps (CoVs for T1: 1.77%; ECV: 6.52%) and good using the full MOLLI series (CoVs for T1: 8.52%; ECV: 12.98%). On comparing AS and controls, who were well matched for age, gender and co-morbidities, there was no significant difference in the native T1 or ECV (T1 = 1103.32 ± 33.07 vs. 1092.27 ± 34.29; ECV = 0.243 ± 0.019 vs. 0.251 ± 0.026 in patients and controls, P > 0.05), which was maintained even after splitting the patients into moderate and severe AS subgroups. CONCLUSION: The test-retest reproducibility of myocardial T1 quantification using MOLLI is excellent in patients with AS and is highest using inline generated T1 maps for analysis. There was no difference in native myocardial T1 or ECV between asymptomatic patients with moderate-severe AS and age-matched controls without valve disease. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: (i) To establish the test-retest reproducibility of myocardial T1 and extracellular volume (ECV) fraction measurement in asymptomatic patients with moderate-severe aortic stenosis (AS), (ii) to compare reproducibility using motion-corrected (MOCO) parametric T1 maps for analysis vs. full MOLLI series of images, and (iii) to compare T1 and ECV between patients and age-matched controls. METHODS AND RESULTS: 3 T cardiac MRI was performed twice on 10 patients (median interval 7 days) to assess reproducibility. An additional 40 patients and 22 asymptomatic controls underwent a single MRI. Native T1 and ECV were calculated by outlining the myocardium on T1 maps generated inline, and using an offline T1 fit on the MOCO multiple inversion-time raw image series, in the reproducibility cohort (n = 10). Reproducibility was excellent using the inline T1 maps (CoVs for T1: 1.77%; ECV: 6.52%) and good using the full MOLLI series (CoVs for T1: 8.52%; ECV: 12.98%). On comparing AS and controls, who were well matched for age, gender and co-morbidities, there was no significant difference in the native T1 or ECV (T1 = 1103.32 ± 33.07 vs. 1092.27 ± 34.29; ECV = 0.243 ± 0.019 vs. 0.251 ± 0.026 in patients and controls, P > 0.05), which was maintained even after splitting the patients into moderate and severe AS subgroups. CONCLUSION: The test-retest reproducibility of myocardial T1 quantification using MOLLI is excellent in patients with AS and is highest using inline generated T1 maps for analysis. There was no difference in native myocardial T1 or ECV between asymptomatic patients with moderate-severe AS and age-matched controls without valve disease. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Francesco Sardanelli; Simone Schiaffino; Moreno Zanardo; Francesco Secchi; Paola Maria Cannaò; Federico Ambrogi; Giovanni Di Leo Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Julia Geiger; Amir A Rahsepar; Kenichiro Suwa; Alex Powell; Ahmadreza Ghasemiesfe; Alex J Barker; Jeremy D Collins; James C Carr; Michael Markl Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-12-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Frank Kramer; Hani N Sabbah; James J Januzzi; Faiez Zannad; J Peter van Tintelen; Erik B Schelbert; Raymond J Kim; Hendrik Milting; Richardus Vonk; Brien Neudeck; Richard Clark; Klaus Witte; Wilfried Dinh; Burkert Pieske; Javed Butler; Mihai Gheorghiade Journal: Heart Fail Rev Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 4.214
Authors: Anvesha Singh; John P Greenwood; Colin Berry; Dana K Dawson; Kai Hogrefe; Damian J Kelly; Vijay Dhakshinamurthy; Chim C Lang; Jeffrey P Khoo; David Sprigings; Richard P Steeds; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Stefan Neubauer; Bernard Prendergast; Bryan Williams; Ruiqi Zhang; Ian Hudson; Iain B Squire; Ian Ford; Nilesh J Samani; Gerry P McCann Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 29.983