| Literature DB >> 27599620 |
Sean M Hamlet1,2, Christopher M Haggerty2,3, Jonathan D Suever2,3, Gregory J Wehner2,4, Jonathan D Grabau2, Kristin N Andres2, Moriel H Vandsburger4,5, David K Powell4, Vincent L Sorrell6, Brandon K Fornwalt7,8,9,10,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) acquisitions often require long scan durations that necessitate respiratory navigator gating. The tradeoff of navigator gating is reduced scan efficiency, particularly when the patient's breathing patterns are inconsistent, as is commonly seen in children. We hypothesized that engaging pediatric participants with a navigator-controlled videogame to help control breathing patterns would improve navigator efficiency and maintain image quality.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Image quality; Navigator efficiency; Pediatrics; Respiratory navigator
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27599620 PMCID: PMC5012042 DOI: 10.1186/s12968-016-0272-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Fig. 1Feedback videogame. a Cropped version of the Siemens Syngo navigator image that was processed in real-time during CMR acquisition to yield the feedback videogame. b Example frame of the navigator feedback videogame interface, which was shown to the child during CMR (yellow overlay text was not shown to the child)
Fig. 2Feedback videogame was shown to children during CMR with an angled mirror and MR-compatible projector
Fig. 3a Average navigator efficiency for No Feedback and Feedback Game image acquisitions. Use of the feedback game significantly increased navigator efficiency compared to no feedback. The solid red line indicates the mean of each group. b Average navigator efficiency vs age for No Feedback (NF) and Feedback Game (FG) image acquisitions. There was no correlation between navigator efficiency and age for either no feedback (r = -0.07, p = 0.63) or feedback game (r = 0.14, p = 0.32) acquisitions. The solid lines indicate the line of best fit for each group
Fig. 4Average navigator efficiency for Off-scanner Trained and Untrained groups. There was no significant difference in navigator efficiency between untrained and off-scanner trained groups for feedback game acquisitions. The solid red line indicates the mean of each group
Fig. 5SNR for all No Feedback and Feedback Game images. Use of the feedback game resulted in significantly increased SNR compared to no feedback
Fig. 6Mean and standard deviation of heart rate for No Feedback and Feedback Game acquisitions. a. Use of the feedback game resulted in significantly higher heart rate compared to no feedback. b. There was no significant difference in standard deviation of heart rate between no feedback and feedback game acquisitions. The solid red line indicates the mean of each group
Average Heart Rate for Off-scanner Trained and Untrained groups
| Heart Rate (bpm) | Trained |
| Untrained |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No Feedback | Feedback Game | No Feedback | Feedback Game | |||
| Mean | 72 ± 13 | 76 ± 16 | 0.03 | 72 ± 9 | 78 ± 9 | <0.001 |
| Standard Deviation | 6.9 ± 5.0 | 5.7 ± 2.4 | 0.80 | 5.3 ± 2.4 | 6.0 ± 2.0 | 0.17 |
Global peak strain results for NF and FG scans
| No Feedback | Feedback Game |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Circumferential Strain (%) | −17 ± 2 | −16 ± 2 | <0.001 |
| Radial Strain (%) | 44 ± 11 | 40 ± 10 | 0.005 |
| Longitudinal Strain (%) | −13 ± 2 | −13 ± 2 | 0.38 |