Literature DB >> 27815793

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with magnetic resonance conditional pacemaker systems at 1.5 T: influence of pacemaker related artifacts on image quality including first pass perfusion, aortic and mitral valve assessment, flow measurement, short tau inversion recovery and T1-weighted imaging.

Oliver Klein-Wiele1,2, Marietta Garmer3, Martin Busch3, Serban Mateiescu3, Rhyan Urbien4, Gianluca Barbone4, Kaffer Kara5, Michael Schulte-Hermes6, Frauke Metz3, Birgit Hailer4, Dietrich Grönemeyer3.   

Abstract

There are only limited data on the impact of device-related artifacts on image quality in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in patients with pacemakers (PM). Adenosine stress perfusion, T1-weighted imaging and flow measurement as well as valve characterization have not been evaluated previously concerning artifact burden. We aimed to assess image quality in all routinely used CMR sequences. We analyzed 2623 myocardial segments in CMR scans of 61 patients with MR conditional PM (mean age 72.1 ± 11.5 years), 23 (37.7%) with right sided, 38 (62.3%) with left-sided devices. There were no relevant artifacts in patients with right-sided devices irrespective of the imaging sequence. In left-sided implants no PM-induced artifacts were found in first pass perfusion sequence, flow analysis and T1 weighted imaging. Only few patients with left-sided devices showed significant PM-artifacts in aortic (3/38, 7.9%)/mitral (n = 2/38, 5.3%) valve imaging and STIR (n = 3/35, 8.6%). In STIR only 14/805 (1.7%) segments were involved. In left-sided PM SSFP cine sequences had more artifact burden than LGE with 377/1505 (25.0%) vs. 162/1505 (10.8%) myocardial segments involved by relevant artifacts respectively (p < 0.001). Apart from cine and LGE imaging in anterior myocardial segments with left-sided implants presence of MRI conditional pacemakers does not affect CMR image quality in multimodal CMR examinations to a significant extent. Our data supports evidence that reduced image quality does not need to be a major concern in PM patients undergoing CMR.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CMR; Cardiac magnetic resonance; Image quality; MRI conditional; Pacemaker

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27815793     DOI: 10.1007/s10554-016-1012-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1569-5794            Impact factor:   2.357


  24 in total

Review 1.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Clinical value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with MR-conditional pacemakers.

Authors:  Claire E Raphael; Vassilis Vassiliou; Francisco Alpendurada; Sanjay K Prasad; Dudley J Pennell; Raad H Mohiaddin
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2015-11-20       Impact factor: 6.875

3.  ESC/EACTS Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease.

Authors:  Jennifer Taylor
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 29.983

4.  Quantitative assessment of artifacts on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging of patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Authors:  Takeshi Sasaki; Rozann Hansford; Menekhem M Zviman; Aravindan Kolandaivelu; David A Bluemke; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins; Henry R Halperin; Saman Nazarian
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 7.792

5.  Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T in patients with cardiac rhythm devices.

Authors:  Francisco Buendía; Óscar Cano; Juan Miguel Sánchez-Gómez; Begoña Igual; Joaquín Osca; María José Sancho-Tello; José Olagüe; Antonio Salvador
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 5.214

6.  Utility of fast cine magnetic resonance imaging and display for the detection of myocardial ischemia in patients not well suited for second harmonic stress echocardiography.

Authors:  W G Hundley; C A Hamilton; M S Thomas; D M Herrington; T B Salido; D W Kitzman; W C Little; K M Link
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1999-10-19       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Cardiac MRI in patients with cardiac pacemakers: practical methods for reducing susceptibility artifacts and optimizing image quality.

Authors:  Touko Kaasalainen; Sari Kivistö; Miia Holmström; Juha Peltonen; Sami Pakarinen; Helena Hänninen; Outi Sipilä
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 1.990

Review 8.  Diagnostic performance of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kiran R Nandalur; Ben A Dwamena; Asim F Choudhri; Mohan R Nandalur; Ruth C Carlos
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2007-09-17       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 9.  T1-mapping in the heart: accuracy and precision.

Authors:  Peter Kellman; Michael S Hansen
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2014-01-04       Impact factor: 5.364

10.  Standardized image interpretation and post processing in cardiovascular magnetic resonance: Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) board of trustees task force on standardized post processing.

Authors:  Jeanette Schulz-Menger; David A Bluemke; Jens Bremerich; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Raymond J Kim; Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; Christopher M Kramer; Dudley J Pennell; Sven Plein; Eike Nagel
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 5.364

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Compact pediatric cardiac magnetic resonance imaging protocols.

Authors:  Evan J Zucker
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2022-07-12

2.  Reducing cardiac implantable electronic device-induced artefacts in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Aino-Maija Vuorinen; Lauri Lehmonen; Jarkko Karvonen; Miia Holmström; Sari Kivistö; Touko Kaasalainen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-08-27       Impact factor: 7.034

Review 3.  Multimodality cardiac imaging in the 21st century: evolution, advances and future opportunities for innovation.

Authors:  Melissa A Daubert; Tina Tailor; Olga James; Leslee J Shaw; Pamela S Douglas; Lynne Koweek
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Cardiac MRI-Update 2020.

Authors:  Anke Busse; Rengarajan Rajagopal; Seyrani Yücel; Ebba Beller; Alper Öner; Felix Streckenbach; Daniel Cantré; Hüseyin Ince; Marc-André Weber; Felix G Meinel
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 0.635

5.  Artefacts in 1.5 Tesla and 3 Tesla cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with leadless cardiac pacemakers.

Authors:  Daniel Kiblboeck; Christian Reiter; Juergen Kammler; Pierre Schmit; Hermann Blessberger; Joerg Kellermair; Franz Fellner; Clemens Steinwender
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 5.364

6.  Feasibility and validation of trans-valvular flow derived by four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in pacemaker recipients.

Authors:  Christopher E D Saunderson; Maria F Paton; Amrit Chowdhary; Louise A E Brown; John Gierula; Anshuman Sengupta; Christopher Kelly; Pei G Chew; Arka Das; Thomas P Craven; Rob J van der Geest; David M Higgins; Liang Zhong; Klaus K Witte; John P Greenwood; Sven Plein; Pankaj Garg; Peter P Swoboda
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 2.546

7.  Safety and image quality of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with retained epicardial pacing wires after heart transplantation.

Authors:  Constantin Gatterer; Marie-Elisabeth Stelzmüller; Andreas Kammerlander; Andreas Zuckermann; Martin Krššák; Christian Loewe; Dietrich Beitzke
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2021-03-15       Impact factor: 5.364

8.  Feasibility of adenosine stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging in patients with MR-conditional transvenous permanent pacemakers and defibrillators.

Authors:  Anna Giulia Pavon; Alessandra Pia Porretta; Dimitri Arangalage; Giulia Domenichini; Tobias Rutz; Sarah Hugelshofer; Etienne Pruvot; Pierre Monney; Patrizio Pascale; Juerg Schwitter
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 5.364

9.  Signal voids of active cardiac implants at 3.0 T CMR.

Authors:  Theresa Reiter; Ingo Weiss; Oliver M Weber; Wolfgang R Bauer
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-04-15       Impact factor: 4.996

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.