Wei Zhang1, Saivivek Bogale2, Farahnaz Golriz3, Rajesh Krishnamurthy4. 1. E. B. Singleton Department of Pediatric Radiology, Texas Children's Hospital, 6701 Fannin St., Houston, TX, 77030, USA. wxzhang1@texaschildrens.org. 2. Department of Radiology, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. 4. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Imaging the heart in children comes with the challenge of constant cardiac motion. A prospective electrocardiography-triggered CT scan allows for scanning during a predetermined phase of the cardiac cycle with least motion. This technique requires knowing the optimal quiescent intervals of cardiac cycles in a pediatric population. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate high-temporal-resolution cine MRI of the heart in children to determine the relationship of heart rate to the optimal quiescent interval within the cardiac cycle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included a total of 225 consecutive patients ages 0-18 years who had high-temporal-resolution cine steady-state free-precession sequence performed as part of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or magnetic resonance angiography study of the heart. We determined the location and duration of the quiescent interval in systole and diastole for heart rates ranging 40-178 beats per minute (bpm). We performed the Wilcoxon signed rank test to compare the duration of quiescent interval in systole and diastole for each heart rate group. RESULTS: The duration of the quiescent interval at heart rates <80 bpm and >90 bpm was significantly longer in diastole and systole, respectively (P<.0001 for all ranges, except for 90-99 bpm [P=.02]). For heart rates 80-89 bpm, diastolic interval was longer than systolic interval, but the difference was not statistically significant (P=.06). We created a chart depicting optimal quiescent intervals across a range of heart rates that could be applied for prospective electrocardiography-triggered CT imaging of the heart. CONCLUSION: The optimal quiescent interval at heart rates <80 bpm is in diastole and at heart rates ≥90 bpm is in systole. The period of quiescence at heart rates 80-89 bpm is uniformly short in systole and diastole.
BACKGROUND: Imaging the heart in children comes with the challenge of constant cardiac motion. A prospective electrocardiography-triggered CT scan allows for scanning during a predetermined phase of the cardiac cycle with least motion. This technique requires knowing the optimal quiescent intervals of cardiac cycles in a pediatric population. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate high-temporal-resolution cine MRI of the heart in children to determine the relationship of heart rate to the optimal quiescent interval within the cardiac cycle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included a total of 225 consecutive patients ages 0-18 years who had high-temporal-resolution cine steady-state free-precession sequence performed as part of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or magnetic resonance angiography study of the heart. We determined the location and duration of the quiescent interval in systole and diastole for heart rates ranging 40-178 beats per minute (bpm). We performed the Wilcoxon signed rank test to compare the duration of quiescent interval in systole and diastole for each heart rate group. RESULTS: The duration of the quiescent interval at heart rates <80 bpm and >90 bpm was significantly longer in diastole and systole, respectively (P<.0001 for all ranges, except for 90-99 bpm [P=.02]). For heart rates 80-89 bpm, diastolic interval was longer than systolic interval, but the difference was not statistically significant (P=.06). We created a chart depicting optimal quiescent intervals across a range of heart rates that could be applied for prospective electrocardiography-triggered CT imaging of the heart. CONCLUSION: The optimal quiescent interval at heart rates <80 bpm is in diastole and at heart rates ≥90 bpm is in systole. The period of quiescence at heart rates 80-89 bpm is uniformly short in systole and diastole.
Authors: Bernd J Wintersperger; Konstantin Nikolaou; Franz von Ziegler; Thorsten Johnson; Carsten Rist; Alexander Leber; Thomas Flohr; Andreas Knez; Maximilian F Reiser; Christoph R Becker Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Kevin R Johnson; Salil J Patel; Amy Whigham; Alex Hakim; Roderic I Pettigrew; John N Oshinski Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2004 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Sebastian Leschka; Hans Scheffel; Lotus Desbiolles; Andre Plass; Oliver Gaemperli; Ines Valenta; Lars Husmann; Thomas G Flohr; Michele Genoni; Borut Marincek; Philipp A Kaufmann; Hatem Alkadhi Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Robert Goetti; Gudrun Feuchtner; Paul Stolzmann; Lotus Desbiolles; Michael Alexander Fischer; Christoph Karlo; Stephan Baumueller; Hans Scheffel; Hatem Alkadhi; Sebastian Leschka Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-06-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Harald Seifarth; Susanne Wienbeck; Michael Püsken; Kai-Uwe Juergens; David Maintz; Christian Vahlhaus; Walter Heindel; Roman Fischbach Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 3.959