OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of arrhythmia-insensitive rapid (AIR) and modified Look-Locker inversion recovery (MOLLI) T1 mapping in patients with cardiomyopathies. METHODS: In 58 patients referred for clinical cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T, we compared MOLLI and AIR native and postcontrast T1 measurements. Two readers independently analyzed myocardial and blood T1 values. Agreement between techniques, interreader agreement per technique, and intrascan agreement per technique were evaluated. RESULTS: The MOLLI and AIR T1 values were strongly correlated (r = 0.98); however, statistically significantly different T1 values were derived (bias 80 milliseconds, pooled data, P < 0.01). Both techniques demonstrated high repeatability (MOLLI, r = 1.00 and coefficient of repeatability [CR] = 72 milliseconds; AIR, r = 0.99 and CR = 184.2 milliseconds) and produced high interreader agreement (MOLLI, r = 1.00 and CR = 51.7 milliseconds; AIR, r = 0.99 and CR = 183.5 milliseconds). CONCLUSIONS: Arrhythmia-insensitive rapid and MOLLI sequences produced significantly different T1 values in a diverse patient cohort.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of arrhythmia-insensitive rapid (AIR) and modified Look-Locker inversion recovery (MOLLI) T1 mapping in patients with cardiomyopathies. METHODS: In 58 patients referred for clinical cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T, we compared MOLLI and AIR native and postcontrast T1 measurements. Two readers independently analyzed myocardial and blood T1 values. Agreement between techniques, interreader agreement per technique, and intrascan agreement per technique were evaluated. RESULTS: The MOLLI and AIR T1 values were strongly correlated (r = 0.98); however, statistically significantly different T1 values were derived (bias 80 milliseconds, pooled data, P < 0.01). Both techniques demonstrated high repeatability (MOLLI, r = 1.00 and coefficient of repeatability [CR] = 72 milliseconds; AIR, r = 0.99 and CR = 184.2 milliseconds) and produced high interreader agreement (MOLLI, r = 1.00 and CR = 51.7 milliseconds; AIR, r = 0.99 and CR = 183.5 milliseconds). CONCLUSIONS:Arrhythmia-insensitive rapid and MOLLI sequences produced significantly different T1 values in a diverse patient cohort.
Authors: Thomas Kampf; Xavier Helluy; Fabian T Gutjahr; Patrick Winter; Cord B Meyer; Peter M Jakob; Wolfgang R Bauer; Christian H Ziener Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-07-08 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ursula Reiter; Gert Reiter; Katrin Dorr; Andreas Greiser; Ralph Maderthaner; Michael Fuchsjäger Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: R J Kim; D S Fieno; T B Parrish; K Harris; E L Chen; O Simonetti; J Bundy; J P Finn; F J Klocke; R M Judd Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-11-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: KyungPyo Hong; Jeremy Collins; Daniel C Lee; Jane E Wilcox; Michael Markl; James Carr; Daniel Kim Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2016-09-05 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Darius Dabir; Nicholas Child; Ashwin Kalra; Toby Rogers; Rolf Gebker; Andrew Jabbour; Sven Plein; Chung-Yao Yu; James Otton; Ananth Kidambi; Adam McDiarmid; David Broadbent; David M Higgins; Bernhard Schnackenburg; Lucy Foote; Ciara Cummins; Eike Nagel; Valentina O Puntmann Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Christopher A Miller; Josephine H Naish; Paul Bishop; Glyn Coutts; David Clark; Sha Zhao; Simon G Ray; Nizar Yonan; Simon G Williams; Andrew S Flett; James C Moon; Andreas Greiser; Geoffrey J M Parker; Matthias Schmitt Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Peter Kellman; Joel R Wilson; Hui Xue; W Patricia Bandettini; Sujata M Shanbhag; Kirk M Druey; Martin Ugander; Andrew E Arai Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2012-09-11 Impact factor: 5.364