Keigo Kawaji1, Akiko Tanaka2, Mita B Patel3, Hui Wang4, Francesco Maffessanti3, Takeyoshi Ota2, Amit R Patel5. 1. Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. Electronic address: kkawaji@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. 3. Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. 4. Philips, Gainesville, FL, United States. 5. Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States; Department of Surgery, Section of Cardiothoracic Surgery, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States.
Abstract
AIMS: To develop a high-resolution, 3D late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technique for improved assessment of myocardial scars, and evaluate its performance against 2D breath-held (BH) LGE MRI using a surgically implanted animal scar model in the right ventricle (RV). METHODS AND RESULTS: A k-space segmented 3D LGE acquisition using CENTRA-PLUS (Contrast ENhanced Timing Robust Acquisition with Preparation of LongitUdinal Signal; or CP) ordering is proposed. 8 pigs were surgically prepared with cardiac patch implantation in the RV, followed in 60days by 1.5T MRI. LGE with Phase-Sensitive Inversion Recovery (PSIR) were performed as follows: 1) 2DBH using pneumatic control, and 2) navigator-gated, 3D free-breathing (3DFB)-CP-LGE with slice-tracking. The animal heart was excised immediately after cardiac MR for scar volume quantification. RV scar volumes were also delineated from the 2DBH and 3DFB-CP-LGE images for comparison against the surgical standard. Apparent scar/normal tissue signal-to-noise ratio (aSNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (aCNR) were also calculated. 3DFB-CP-LGE technique was successfully performed in all animals. No difference in aCNR was noted, but aSNR was significantly higher using the 3D technique (p<0.05). Against the surgical reference volume, the 3DFB-CP-LGE-derived delineation yielded significantly less volume quantification error compared to 2DBH-derived volumes (15±10% vs 55±33%; p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Compared to conventional 2DBH-LGE, 3DFB-LGE acquisition using CENTRA-PLUS provided superior scar volume quantification and improved aSNR.
AIMS: To develop a high-resolution, 3D late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technique for improved assessment of myocardial scars, and evaluate its performance against 2D breath-held (BH) LGE MRI using a surgically implanted animal scar model in the right ventricle (RV). METHODS AND RESULTS: A k-space segmented 3D LGE acquisition using CENTRA-PLUS (Contrast ENhanced Timing Robust Acquisition with Preparation of LongitUdinal Signal; or CP) ordering is proposed. 8 pigs were surgically prepared with cardiac patch implantation in the RV, followed in 60days by 1.5T MRI. LGE with Phase-Sensitive Inversion Recovery (PSIR) were performed as follows: 1) 2DBH using pneumatic control, and 2) navigator-gated, 3D free-breathing (3DFB)-CP-LGE with slice-tracking. The animal heart was excised immediately after cardiac MR for scar volume quantification. RV scar volumes were also delineated from the 2DBH and 3DFB-CP-LGE images for comparison against the surgical standard. Apparent scar/normal tissue signal-to-noise ratio (aSNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (aCNR) were also calculated. 3DFB-CP-LGE technique was successfully performed in all animals. No difference in aCNR was noted, but aSNR was significantly higher using the 3D technique (p<0.05). Against the surgical reference volume, the 3DFB-CP-LGE-derived delineation yielded significantly less volume quantification error compared to 2DBH-derived volumes (15±10% vs 55±33%; p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Compared to conventional 2DBH-LGE, 3DFB-LGE acquisition using CENTRA-PLUS provided superior scar volume quantification and improved aSNR.
Authors: Akiko Tanaka; Keigo Kawaji; Amit R Patel; Yasuhiko Tabata; Martin C Burke; Mahesh P Gupta; Takeyoshi Ota Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Thanh D Nguyen; Pascal Spincemaille; Jonathan W Weinsaft; Bernard Y Ho; Matthew D Cham; Martin R Prince; Yi Wang Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Gabriele M Beck; Jan De Becker; Alun C Jones; Marcus von Falkenhausen; Winfried A Willinek; Jürgen Gieseke Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Mehdi H Moghari; Mehmet Akçakaya; Alan O'Connor; Tamer A Basha; Michele Casanova; Douglas Stanton; Lois Goepfert; Kraig V Kissinger; Beth Goddu; Michael L Chuang; Vahid Tarokh; Warren J Manning; Reza Nezafat Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-06-10 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: R J Kim; E Wu; A Rafael; E L Chen; M A Parker; O Simonetti; F J Klocke; R O Bonow; R M Judd Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Anja Wagner; Heiko Mahrholdt; Thomas A Holly; Michael D Elliott; Matthias Regenfus; Michele Parker; Francis J Klocke; Robert O Bonow; Raymond J Kim; Robert M Judd Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-02-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: José F Rodríguez-Palomares; José T Ortiz-Pérez; Daniel C Lee; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci; Paula Tejedor; Robert O Bonow; Edwin Wu Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 5.364