Edyta Blaszczyk1,2, Agnieszka Töpper1,2, Luisa Schmacht1,2, Felix Wanke1,2, Andreas Greiser3, Jeanette Schulz-Menger1,2, Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff4,5. 1. Working Group Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, A Joint Cooperation Between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine, Lindenberger Weg 80, 13125, Berlin, Germany. 2. Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch, Berlin, Germany. 3. Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany. 4. Working Group Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, A Joint Cooperation Between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine, Lindenberger Weg 80, 13125, Berlin, Germany. florian.von-knobelsdorff@charite.de. 5. Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch, Berlin, Germany. florian.von-knobelsdorff@charite.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to study the influence of small variations in spatial resolution and contrast agent dosage on myocardial T1 relaxation time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine healthy volunteers underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 3T twice, including a modified look-locker inversion recovery (MOLLI) technique-3(3)3(3)5-for T1 mapping. Native T1 was assessed in three spatial resolutions (voxel size 1.4 × 1.4 × 6, 1.6 × 1.6 × 6, 1.7 × 1.7 × 6 mm3), and postcontrast T1 after 0.1 and 0.2 mmol/kg gadobutrol. Partition coefficient was calculated based on myocardial and blood T1. T1 analysis was done per segment, per slice, and for the whole heart. RESULTS: Native T1 values did not differ with varying spatial resolution per segment (p = 0.116-0.980), per slice (basal: p = 0.772; middle: p = 0.639; apex: p = 0.276), and globally (p = 0.191). Postcontrast T1 values were significantly lower with higher contrast agent dosage (p < 0.001). The global partition coefficient was 0.43 ± 0.3 for 0.2 and 0.1 mmol gadobutrol (p = 0.079). CONCLUSION: Related to the tested MOLLI technique at 3T, very small variations in spatial resolution (voxel sizes between 1.4 × 1.4 × 6 and 1.7 × 1.7 × 6 mm3) remained without effect on the native T1 relaxation times. Postcontrast T1 values were naturally shorter with higher contrast agent dosage while the partition coefficient remained constant. Further studies are necessary to test whether these conclusions hold true for larger matrix sizes and in larger cohorts.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to study the influence of small variations in spatial resolution and contrast agent dosage on myocardial T1 relaxation time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine healthy volunteers underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 3T twice, including a modified look-locker inversion recovery (MOLLI) technique-3(3)3(3)5-for T1 mapping. Native T1 was assessed in three spatial resolutions (voxel size 1.4 × 1.4 × 6, 1.6 × 1.6 × 6, 1.7 × 1.7 × 6 mm3), and postcontrast T1 after 0.1 and 0.2 mmol/kg gadobutrol. Partition coefficient was calculated based on myocardial and blood T1. T1 analysis was done per segment, per slice, and for the whole heart. RESULTS: Native T1 values did not differ with varying spatial resolution per segment (p = 0.116-0.980), per slice (basal: p = 0.772; middle: p = 0.639; apex: p = 0.276), and globally (p = 0.191). Postcontrast T1 values were significantly lower with higher contrast agent dosage (p < 0.001). The global partition coefficient was 0.43 ± 0.3 for 0.2 and 0.1 mmol gadobutrol (p = 0.079). CONCLUSION: Related to the tested MOLLI technique at 3T, very small variations in spatial resolution (voxel sizes between 1.4 × 1.4 × 6 and 1.7 × 1.7 × 6 mm3) remained without effect on the native T1 relaxation times. Postcontrast T1 values were naturally shorter with higher contrast agent dosage while the partition coefficient remained constant. Further studies are necessary to test whether these conclusions hold true for larger matrix sizes and in larger cohorts.
Authors: Marcelo Souto Nacif; Evrim B Turkbey; Neville Gai; Saman Nazarian; Rob J van der Geest; Radwa A Noureldin; Christopher T Sibley; Martin Ugander; Songtao Liu; Andrew E Arai; João A C Lima; David A Bluemke Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-09-23 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Olaf Dietrich; José G Raya; Scott B Reeder; Maximilian F Reiser; Stefan O Schoenberg Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Songtao Liu; Jing Han; Marcelo S Nacif; Jacquin Jones; Nadine Kawel; Peter Kellman; Christopher T Sibley; David A Bluemke Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2012-12-28 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Donnie Cameron; David M Higgins; Christian Stehning; Marc Kouwenhoven; Mustapha Bouhrara; Michael P Frenneaux; Dana K Dawson; Thomas W Redpath Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2015-02-07 Impact factor: 3.130
Authors: Darius Dabir; Nicholas Child; Ashwin Kalra; Toby Rogers; Rolf Gebker; Andrew Jabbour; Sven Plein; Chung-Yao Yu; James Otton; Ananth Kidambi; Adam McDiarmid; David Broadbent; David M Higgins; Bernhard Schnackenburg; Lucy Foote; Ciara Cummins; Eike Nagel; Valentina O Puntmann Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 5.364