H Fan1, S Li2, M Lu3, G Yin2, X Yang2, T Lan2, L Dai2, X Chen2, J Li2, Y Zhang2, A Sirajuddin4, P Kellman5, A E Arai4, S Zhao6. 1. Department of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Center, Fuwai Hospital, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China; Department of Radiology, Air Force General Hospital, People's Liberation Army, Beijing, China. 2. Department of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Center, Fuwai Hospital, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. 3. Department of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Center, Fuwai Hospital, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China; National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA. Electronic address: coolkan@163.com. 4. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA. 5. Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Branch, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, USA. 6. Department of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Center, Fuwai Hospital, State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. Electronic address: cjr.zhaoshihua@vip.163.com.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the image quality and diagnostic agreement with a head-to-head comparison of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) images acquired by the motion-corrected (MOCO) balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) phase sensitivity inversion recovery (PSIR) and conventional segmented fast low angle shot (FLASH) PSIR methods15,16 in a patient cohort with a wide spectrum of cardiovascular disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 59 consecutive patients, signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) of the normal myocardium (NM), LGE, and blood pool (BP) were pair-wise compared between the two different sequences. A further semi-qualitative score system (graded 1 -4) was used to compare the overall image quality (OIQ). The diagnostic agreement of the two techniques were evaluated by both transmural severity and absolutely quantitative size of LGE. RESULTS: The SNRs of the NM, LGE, and BP of MOCO bSSFP were 4.8±3.4, 53.6±35.6 and 43.2±29.3, compared with 3.9±3.6 (p=0.126), 27.7±18.5 (p<0.001) and 24.3±13.4 (p<0.001) of FLASH LGE, respectively. The CNRs of LGE to NM, LGE to BP, and BP to NM were 48.3±33.1 versus 23.8±16.7 (p<0.001), 6.5±21.6 versus 3.8±10.8 (p<0.001), and 38.3±27.2 versus 20.3±10.7 (p=0.448), respectively. The OIQ of MOCO bSSFP was higher than that of segmented FLASH (median 4 versus median 3, p<0.001). For quantification of LGE size, there is good agreement and high correlation (r=0.992, p<0.001) between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: MOCO bSSFP is a feasible, robust sequence for LGE imaging, especially for patients with arrhythmia and those incapable of breath-holding due to severe heart failure.
AIM: To evaluate the image quality and diagnostic agreement with a head-to-head comparison of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) images acquired by the motion-corrected (MOCO) balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) phase sensitivity inversion recovery (PSIR) and conventional segmented fast low angle shot (FLASH) PSIR methods15,16 in a patient cohort with a wide spectrum of cardiovascular disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 59 consecutive patients, signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) of the normal myocardium (NM), LGE, and blood pool (BP) were pair-wise compared between the two different sequences. A further semi-qualitative score system (graded 1 -4) was used to compare the overall image quality (OIQ). The diagnostic agreement of the two techniques were evaluated by both transmural severity and absolutely quantitative size of LGE. RESULTS: The SNRs of the NM, LGE, and BP of MOCO bSSFP were 4.8±3.4, 53.6±35.6 and 43.2±29.3, compared with 3.9±3.6 (p=0.126), 27.7±18.5 (p<0.001) and 24.3±13.4 (p<0.001) of FLASH LGE, respectively. The CNRs of LGE to NM, LGE to BP, and BP to NM were 48.3±33.1 versus 23.8±16.7 (p<0.001), 6.5±21.6 versus 3.8±10.8 (p<0.001), and 38.3±27.2 versus 20.3±10.7 (p=0.448), respectively. The OIQ of MOCO bSSFP was higher than that of segmented FLASH (median 4 versus median 3, p<0.001). For quantification of LGE size, there is good agreement and high correlation (r=0.992, p<0.001) between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: MOCO bSSFP is a feasible, robust sequence for LGE imaging, especially for patients with arrhythmia and those incapable of breath-holding due to severe heart failure.
Authors: Arlene Sirajuddin; S Mojdeh Mirmomen; Seth J Kligerman; Daniel W Groves; Allen P Burke; Faraz Kureshi; Charles S White; Andrew E Arai Journal: Radiographics Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Lei Zhao; Songnan Li; Xiaohai Ma; Rong Bai; Nian Liu; Ning Li; Paul Schoenhagen; Changsheng Ma Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-09-16 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Cui Yan; Junjiao Hu; Yanyu Li; Xingzhi Xie; Zhimin Zou; Qiyu Deng; Xiaoyue Zhou; Xiaoming Bi; Mu Zeng; Jun Liu Journal: J Int Med Res Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 1.671