Literature DB >> 30357547

Native T1 mapping to detect extent of acute and chronic myocardial infarction: comparison with late gadolinium enhancement technique.

Amardeep Ghosh Dastidar1,2, Iwan Harries1,2, Giulia Pontecorboli1, Vito D Bruno1,2, Estefania De Garate1,3,2, Charlie Moret1, Anna Baritussio1, Thomas W Johnson1, Elisa McAlindon1,3, Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci4,5,6.   

Abstract

Investigate whether native-T1 mapping can assess the transmural extent of myocardial infarction (TEI) thereby differentiating viable from non-viable myocardium without the use of gadolinium-contrast in both acute and chronic myocardial infarction (aMI and cMI). Sixty patients (30 cMI > 1 year and 30 aMI day 2 STEMI) and 20 healthy-controls underwent 1.5 T CMR to assess left ventricular function (cine), native-T1 mapping (MOLLI sequence 5(3)3, motion-corrected) and the presence and TEI from late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) images. Segments with TEI > 75% was considered non-viable. Gold-standard LGE-TEI was compared with corresponding segmental native-T1. Segmental native-T1 correlated significantly with TEI (R = 0.74, p < 0.001 in cMI and R = 0.57, p < 0.001 in aMI). Native-T1 differentiated segments with no LGE (1031 ± 31 ms), LGE positive but viable (1103 ± 57 ms) and LGE positive but non-viable (1206 ± 118 ms) in cMI (p < 0.01). It also differentiated segments with no LGE (1054 ± 65 m), LGE positive but viable (1135 ± 73 ms) and LGE positive but non-viable (1168 ± 71 ms) in aMI (p < 0.01). ROC analysis demonstrated excellent accuracy of native-T1 mapping compared to LGE-TEI (AUC - 0.88, p < 0.001 in cMI, vs AUC - 0.83, p < 0.001 in aMI). Native-T1 performed better in cMI than aMI (p < 0.01). In cMI a segmental T1 threshold of 1085 ms differentiated viable from non-viable segments with a sensitivity 88% and specificity of 88% whereas a T1 of 1110 ms differentiated viable from nonviable with 79% sensitivity and 79% specificity in aMI. Native-T1 mapping correlates significantly with TEI thereby differentiating between normal, viable, and non-viable myocardium with distinctive T1 profiles in aMI and cMI. Native T1-mapping to detect MI performed better in cMI compared to aMI due to absence of myocardial oedema. Native-T1 mapping holds promise for viability assessment without the need for gadolinium-contrast agent.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Myocardial infarction; T1 mapping; Viability

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30357547     DOI: 10.1007/s10554-018-1467-1

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


  27 in total

1.  Quantitative tissue characterization of infarct core and border zone in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy by magnetic resonance is associated with future cardiovascular events.

Authors:  Shahriar Heidary; Harendra Patel; Jaehoon Chung; Hajime Yokota; Sandeep N Gupta; Mihoko V Bennett; Chandra Katikireddy; Patricia Nguyen; John M Pauly; Masahiro Terashima; Michael V McConnell; Phillip C Yang
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Operator induced variability in left ventricular measurements with cardiovascular magnetic resonance is improved after training.

Authors:  Theodoros D Karamitsos; Lucy E Hudsmith; Joseph B Selvanayagam; Stefan Neubauer; Jane M Francis
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 3.  CMR imaging assessing viability in patients with chronic ventricular dysfunction due to coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of prospective trials.

Authors:  Jorge Romero; Xiaonan Xue; Waddy Gonzalez; Mario J Garcia
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-05

4.  ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation.

Authors:  Ph Gabriel Steg; Stefan K James; Dan Atar; Luigi P Badano; Carina Blömstrom-Lundqvist; Michael A Borger; Carlo Di Mario; Kenneth Dickstein; Gregory Ducrocq; Francisco Fernandez-Aviles; Anthony H Gershlick; Pantaleo Giannuzzi; Sigrun Halvorsen; Kurt Huber; Peter Juni; Adnan Kastrati; Juhani Knuuti; Mattie J Lenzen; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Marco Valgimigli; Arnoud van 't Hof; Petr Widimsky; Doron Zahger
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2012-08-24       Impact factor: 29.983

5.  Third universal definition of myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Allan S Jaffe; Maarten L Simoons; Bernard R Chaitman; Harvey D White; Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Harvey D White; Allan S Jaffe; Hugo A Katus; Fred S Apple; Bertil Lindahl; David A Morrow; Bernard A Chaitman; Peter M Clemmensen; Per Johanson; Hanoch Hod; Richard Underwood; Jeroen J Bax; Robert O Bonow; Fausto Pinto; Raymond J Gibbons; Keith A Fox; Dan Atar; L Kristin Newby; Marcello Galvani; Christian W Hamm; Barry F Uretsky; Ph Gabriel Steg; William Wijns; Jean-Pierre Bassand; Phillippe Menasché; Jan Ravkilde; E Magnus Ohman; Elliott M Antman; Lars C Wallentin; Paul W Armstrong; Maarten L Simoons; James L Januzzi; Markku S Nieminen; Mihai Gheorghiade; Gerasimos Filippatos; Russell V Luepker; Stephen P Fortmann; Wayne D Rosamond; Dan Levy; David Wood; Sidney C Smith; Dayi Hu; José-Luis Lopez-Sendon; Rose Marie Robertson; Douglas Weaver; Michael Tendera; Alfred A Bove; Alexander N Parkhomenko; Elena J Vasilieva; Shanti Mendis
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2012-08-24       Impact factor: 29.983

6.  Relationship of MRI delayed contrast enhancement to irreversible injury, infarct age, and contractile function.

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

7.  The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction.

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

8.  Delayed contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the prediction of regional functional improvement after acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Aernout M Beek; Harald P Kühl; Olga Bondarenko; Jos W R Twisk; Mark B M Hofman; Willem G van Dockum; Cees A Visser; Albert C van Rossum
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2003-09-03       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance by non contrast T1-mapping allows assessment of severity of injury in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Erica Dall'Armellina; Stefan K Piechnik; Vanessa M Ferreira; Quang Le Si; Matthew D Robson; Jane M Francis; Florim Cuculi; Rajesh K Kharbanda; Adrian P Banning; Robin P Choudhury; Theodoros D Karamitsos; Stefan Neubauer
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2012-02-06       Impact factor: 5.364

10.  Diagnostic value of pre-contrast T1 mapping in acute and chronic myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Erica Dall'Armellina; Vanessa M Ferreira; Rajesh K Kharbanda; Bernard Prendergast; Stefan K Piechnik; Matthew D Robson; Melanie Jones; Jane M Francis; Robin P Choudhury; Stefan Neubauer
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2013-06
View more
  7 in total

1.  Cardiovascular imaging 2019 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

Authors:  Johan H C Reiber; Gabriel T R Pereira; Luis A P Dallan; Hiram G Bezerra; Johan De Sutter; Arthur E Stillman; Nico R L Van de Veire; Joachim Lotz
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 2.357

2.  Myocardial blood flow is the dominant factor influencing cardiac magnetic resonance adenosine stress T2.

Authors:  Jill J Weyers; Venkat Ramanan; Ahsan Javed; Jennifer Barry; Melissa Larsen; Krishna Nayak; Graham A Wright; Nilesh R Ghugre
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 4.044

Review 3.  Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Parametric Mapping Techniques: Clinical Applications and Limitations.

Authors:  Eleni Nakou; Rishi K Patel; Marianna Fontana; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2021-11-11       Impact factor: 2.931

4.  Free-breathing, non-ECG, simultaneous myocardial T1 , T2 , T2 *, and fat-fraction mapping with motion-resolved cardiovascular MR multitasking.

Authors:  Tianle Cao; Nan Wang; Alan C Kwan; Hsu-Lei Lee; Xianglun Mao; Yibin Xie; Kim-Lien Nguyen; Caroline M Colbert; Fei Han; Pei Han; Hui Han; Anthony G Christodoulou; Debiao Li
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2022-06-17       Impact factor: 3.737

Review 5.  Recent Advances in Fibrosis and Scar Segmentation From Cardiac MRI: A State-of-the-Art Review and Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Yinzhe Wu; Zeyu Tang; Binghuan Li; David Firmin; Guang Yang
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 4.566

Review 6.  Imaging tools for assessment of myocardial fibrosis in humans: the need for greater detail.

Authors:  Summer Hassan; Carolyn J Barrett; David J Crossman
Journal:  Biophys Rev       Date:  2020-07-23

7.  Radiomics of Non-Contrast-Enhanced T1 Mapping: Diagnostic and Predictive Performance for Myocardial Injury in Acute ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Authors:  Quanmei Ma; Yue Ma; Tongtong Yu; Zhaoqing Sun; Yang Hou
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 3.500

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.