PURPOSE: Noninvasive stiffness imaging techniques (elastography) can image myocardial tissue biomechanics in vivo. For cardiac MR elastography (MRE) techniques, the optimal vibration frequency for in vivo experiments is unknown. Furthermore, the accuracy of cardiac MRE has never been evaluated in a geometrically accurate phantom. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the necessary driving frequency to obtain accurate three-dimensional (3D) cardiac MRE stiffness estimates in a geometrically accurate diastolic cardiac phantom and to determine the optimal vibration frequency that can be introduced in healthy volunteers. METHODS: The 3D cardiac MRE was performed on eight healthy volunteers using 80 Hz, 100 Hz, 140 Hz, 180 Hz, and 220 Hz vibration frequencies. These frequencies were tested in a geometrically accurate diastolic heart phantom and compared with dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA). RESULTS: The 3D Cardiac MRE was shown to be feasible in volunteers at frequencies as high as 180 Hz. MRE and DMA agreed within 5% at frequencies greater than 180 Hz in the cardiac phantom. However, octahedral shear strain signal to noise ratios and myocardial coverage was shown to be highest at a frequency of 140 Hz across all subjects. CONCLUSION: This study motivates future evaluation of high-frequency 3D MRE in patient populations. Magn Reson Med 77:351-360, 2017.
PURPOSE: Noninvasive stiffness imaging techniques (elastography) can image myocardial tissue biomechanics in vivo. For cardiac MR elastography (MRE) techniques, the optimal vibration frequency for in vivo experiments is unknown. Furthermore, the accuracy of cardiac MRE has never been evaluated in a geometrically accurate phantom. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the necessary driving frequency to obtain accurate three-dimensional (3D) cardiac MRE stiffness estimates in a geometrically accurate diastolic cardiac phantom and to determine the optimal vibration frequency that can be introduced in healthy volunteers. METHODS: The 3D cardiac MRE was performed on eight healthy volunteers using 80 Hz, 100 Hz, 140 Hz, 180 Hz, and 220 Hz vibration frequencies. These frequencies were tested in a geometrically accurate diastolic heart phantom and compared with dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA). RESULTS: The 3D Cardiac MRE was shown to be feasible in volunteers at frequencies as high as 180 Hz. MRE and DMA agreed within 5% at frequencies greater than 180 Hz in the cardiac phantom. However, octahedral shear strain signal to noise ratios and myocardial coverage was shown to be highest at a frequency of 140 Hz across all subjects. CONCLUSION: This study motivates future evaluation of high-frequency 3D MRE in patient populations. Magn Reson Med 77:351-360, 2017.
Authors: Stacie I Ringleb; Qingshan Chen; David S Lake; Armando Manduca; Richard L Ehman; Kai-Nan An Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: M D J McGarry; E E W Van Houten; P R Perriñez; A J Pattison; J B Weaver; K D Paulsen Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2011-06-08 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Arunark Kolipaka; Shivani R Aggarwal; Kiaran P McGee; Nandan Anavekar; Armando Manduca; Richard L Ehman; Philip A Araoz Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-02-14 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Arunark Kolipaka; Kiaran P McGee; Philip A Araoz; Kevin J Glaser; Armando Manduca; Anthony J Romano; Richard L Ehman Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Waldemar Hosch; Michael Bock; Martin Libicher; Sebastian Ley; Ute Hegenbart; Thomas J Dengler; Hugo A Katus; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Günter W Kauffmann; Arnt V Kristen Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Matthew C Murphy; John Huston; Clifford R Jack; Kevin J Glaser; Matthew L Senjem; Jun Chen; Armando Manduca; Joel P Felmlee; Richard L Ehman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Cristian A Linte; Jon J Camp; Maryam E Rettmann; Dieter Haemmerich; Mehmet K Aktas; David T Huang; Douglas L Packer; David R Holmes Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2018-03-01
Authors: Shivaram P Arunachalam; Arvin Arani; Francis Baffour; Joseph A Rysavy; Phillip J Rossman; Kevin J Glaser; David S Lake; Joshua D Trzasko; Armando Manduca; Kiaran P McGee; Richard L Ehman; Philip A Araoz Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-04-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Emily Rose Triolo; Oleksandr Khegai; Efe Ozkaya; Nicholas Rossi; Akbar Alipour; Lazar Fleysher; Priti Balchandani; Mehmet Kurt Journal: Curr Protoc Date: 2022-03
Authors: Yi Sui; Arvin Arani; Joshua D Trzasko; Matthew C Murphy; Phillip J Rossman; Kevin J Glaser; Kiaran P McGee; Armando Manduca; Richard L Ehman; Philip A Araoz; John Huston Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: A Manduca; T L Rossman; D S Lake; K J Glaser; A Arani; S P Arunachalam; P J Rossman; J D Trzasko; R L Ehman; D Dragomir-Daescu; P A Araoz Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2018-08-13 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Arvin Arani; Shivaram P Arunachalam; Ian C Y Chang; Francis Baffour; Phillip J Rossman; Kevin J Glaser; Joshua D Trzasko; Kiaran P McGee; Armando Manduca; Martha Grogan; Angela Dispenzieri; Richard L Ehman; Philip A Araoz Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-02-25 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Yi Sui; Shivaram P Arunachalam; Arvin Arani; Joshua D Trzasko; Phillip M Young; James F Glockner; Kevin J Glaser; David S Lake; Kiaran P McGee; Armando Manduca; Phillip J Rossman; Richard L Ehman; Philip A Araoz Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Wiebke Neumann; Andreas Bichert; Jonas Fleischhauer; Antonia Stern; Roxana Figuli; Manfred Wilhelm; Lothar R Schad; Frank G Zöllner Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 3.240