Mathilde Vermersch1, Benjamin Longère1, Augustin Coisne2,3, Michaela Schmidt4, Christoph Forman4, Aurélien Monnet4, Julien Pagniez1, Valentina Silvestri1, Arianna Simeone1, Emma Cheasty5, David Montaigne2,3, François Pontana6,7. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Radiology, Institut Cœur-Poumon, CHU Lille, Boulevard du Pr Jules Leclercq, 59037, Lille Cedex, France. 2. Department of Clinical Physiology and Echocardiography, CHU Lille, Lille, France. 3. INSERM UMR 1011; Institut Pasteur de Lille; EGID (European Genomic Institute for Diabetes), FR3508; Univ Lille, 59000, Lille, France. 4. Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany. 5. Department of Cardiovascular Imaging, St Bartholomew's Hospital, West Smithfield, London, UK. 6. Department of Cardiovascular Radiology, Institut Cœur-Poumon, CHU Lille, Boulevard du Pr Jules Leclercq, 59037, Lille Cedex, France. francois.pontana@chru-lille.fr. 7. INSERM UMR 1011; Institut Pasteur de Lille; EGID (European Genomic Institute for Diabetes), FR3508; Univ Lille, 59000, Lille, France. francois.pontana@chru-lille.fr.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted in order to evaluate the accuracy of a compressed sensing (CS) real-time single-breath-hold cine sequence for the assessment of left and right ventricular functional parameters in daily practice. METHODS: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) cine images were acquired from 100 consecutive patients using both the reference segmented multi-breath-hold steady-state free precession (SSFP) acquisition and a prototype single-breath-hold real-time CS sequence, providing the same slice number, position, and thickness. For both sequences, the left (LV) and right ventricular (RV) ejection fractions (EF) and end-diastolic volumes (EDV) were assessed as well as LV mass (LVM). The visualization of wall-motion disorders (WMD) and signal void related to mitral or tricuspid regurgitation was also analyzed. RESULTS: The CS sequence mean scan time was 23 ± 6 versus 510 ± 109 s for the multi-breath-hold SSFP sequence (p < 0.001). There was an excellent correlation between the two sequences regarding mean LVEF (r = 0.995), LVEDV (r = 0.997), LVM (r = 0.981), RVEF (r = 0.979), and RVEDV (r = 0.983). Moreover, inter- and intraobserver agreements were very strong with intraclass correlations of 0.96 and 0.99, respectively. On CS images, mitral or tricuspid regurgitation visualization was good (AUC = 0.85 and 0.81, respectively; ROC curve analysis) and wall-motion disorder visualization was excellent (AUC ≥ 0.97). CONCLUSION: CS real-time single-breath-hold cine imaging reduces CMR scan duration by almost 20 times in daily practice while providing reliable measurements of both left and right ventricles. There was no clinically relevant information loss regarding valve regurgitation and wall-motion disorder depiction. KEY POINTS: • Compressed sensing single-breath-hold real-time cine imaging is a reliable sequence in daily practice. • Fast CS real-time imaging reduces CMR scan time and improves patient workflow. • There is no clinically relevant information loss with CS regarding heart valve regurgitation or wall-motion disorders.
OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted in order to evaluate the accuracy of a compressed sensing (CS) real-time single-breath-hold cine sequence for the assessment of left and right ventricular functional parameters in daily practice. METHODS: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) cine images were acquired from 100 consecutive patients using both the reference segmented multi-breath-hold steady-state free precession (SSFP) acquisition and a prototype single-breath-hold real-time CS sequence, providing the same slice number, position, and thickness. For both sequences, the left (LV) and right ventricular (RV) ejection fractions (EF) and end-diastolic volumes (EDV) were assessed as well as LV mass (LVM). The visualization of wall-motion disorders (WMD) and signal void related to mitral or tricuspid regurgitation was also analyzed. RESULTS: The CS sequence mean scan time was 23 ± 6 versus 510 ± 109 s for the multi-breath-hold SSFP sequence (p < 0.001). There was an excellent correlation between the two sequences regarding mean LVEF (r = 0.995), LVEDV (r = 0.997), LVM (r = 0.981), RVEF (r = 0.979), and RVEDV (r = 0.983). Moreover, inter- and intraobserver agreements were very strong with intraclass correlations of 0.96 and 0.99, respectively. On CS images, mitral or tricuspid regurgitation visualization was good (AUC = 0.85 and 0.81, respectively; ROC curve analysis) and wall-motion disorder visualization was excellent (AUC ≥ 0.97). CONCLUSION:CS real-time single-breath-hold cine imaging reduces CMR scan duration by almost 20 times in daily practice while providing reliable measurements of both left and right ventricles. There was no clinically relevant information loss regarding valve regurgitation and wall-motion disorder depiction. KEY POINTS: • Compressed sensing single-breath-hold real-time cine imaging is a reliable sequence in daily practice. • Fast CS real-time imaging reduces CMR scan time and improves patient workflow. • There is no clinically relevant information loss with CS regarding heart valve regurgitation or wall-motion disorders.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breath holding; Heart ventricles; Magnetic resonance imaging
Authors: S Plein; T N Bloomer; J P Ridgway; T R Jones; G J Bainbridge; M U Sivananthan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Juliane Goebel; Felix Nensa; Haemi P Schemuth; Stefan Maderwald; Marcel Gratz; Harald H Quick; Thomas Schlosser; Kai Nassenstein Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-01-20 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Andrew C Larson; Peter Kellman; Andrew Arai; Glenn A Hirsch; Elliot McVeigh; Debiao Li; Orlando P Simonetti Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Juliane Goebel; Felix Nensa; Haemi P Schemuth; Stefan Maderwald; Harald H Quick; Thomas Schlosser; Kai Nassenstein Journal: Acta Radiol Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 1.990
Authors: Gabriel C Camargo; Fernanda Erthal; Leticia Sabioni; Filipe Penna; Ralph Strecker; Michaela Schmidt; Michael O Zenge; Ronaldo de S L Lima; Ilan Gottlieb Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Holger Haubenreisser; Thomas Henzler; Johannes Budjan; Sonja Sudarski; Michael O Zenge; Michaela Schmidt; Mariappan S Nadar; Martin Borggrefe; Stefan O Schoenberg; Theano Papavassiliu Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Blake I Gardner; Scott E Bingham; Marvin R Allen; Duane D Blatter; Jeffrey L Anderson Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound Date: 2009-08-18 Impact factor: 2.062
Authors: El-Sayed H Ibrahim; Luba Frank; Dhiraj Baruah; V Emre Arpinar; Andrew S Nencka; Kevin M Koch; L Tugan Muftuler; Orhan Unal; Jadranka Stojanovska; Jason C Rubenstein; Sherry-Ann Brown; John Charlson; Elizabeth M Gore; Carmen Bergom Journal: Int J Biomed Imaging Date: 2021-05-15
Authors: James T Brown; Anita Saigal; Nina Karia; Rishi K Patel; Yousuf Razvi; Natalie Constantinou; Jennifer A Steeden; Swapna Mandal; Tushar Kotecha; Marianna Fontana; James Goldring; Vivek Muthurangu; Daniel S Knight Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-04-26 Impact factor: 6.106