Yanfeng Meng1, Zhiguang Mo2,3, Jinying Hao1, Yueyou Peng1, Hui Yan1, Jingbo Mu4, Dengfeng Ma4, Xiaoliang Zhang5, Ye Li2,3. 1. Department of MRI, Taiyuan Central Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China. 2. Paul C. Lauterbur Research Center for Biomedical Imaging, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China. 3. The Key Laboratory for Magnetic Resonance and Multimodality Imaging of Guangdong Province, Shenzhen, China. 4. Department of Cardiology, Taiyuan Central Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China. 5. Department of Biomedical Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To validate the feasibility of generating high-resolution intravascular 3.0 Tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging of the coronary artery wall to further plaque imaging. METHODS: A receive-only 0.014-inch diameter magnetic resonance imaging guidewire (MRIG) was manufactured for intravascular imaging within a phantom experiment and the coronary artery wall of the swine. For coronary artery wall imaging, both high-resolution images and conventional resolution images were acquired. A 16-channel commercial surface coil for magnetic resonance imaging was employed for the control group. RESULTS: For the phantom experiment, the MRIG showed a higher signal-to-noise ratio than the surface coil. The peak signal-to-noise ratio of the MRIG and the surface coil-generated imaging were 213.6 and 19.8, respectively. The signal-to-noise ratio decreased rapidly as the distance from the MRIG increased. For the coronary artery wall experiment, the vessel wall imaging by the MRIG could be identified clearly, whereas the vessel wall imaging by the surface coil was blurred. The average signal-to-noise ratio of the artery wall was 21.1±5.40 by the MRIG compared to 8.4±2.19 by the surface coil, where the resolution was set at 0.2 mm × 0.2 mm × 2 mm. As expected, the high-resolution sequence clearly showed more details than the conventional resolution sequence set at 0.7 mm × 0.7 mm × 2.0 mm. Histological examination showed no evidence of mechanical injuries in the target vessel walls. CONCLUSIONS: The study validated the feasibility of generating magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 0.2 mm × 0.2 mm × 2 mm for the coronary artery wall using a 0.014 inch MRIG. 2021 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: To validate the feasibility of generating high-resolution intravascular 3.0 Tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging of the coronary artery wall to further plaque imaging. METHODS: A receive-only 0.014-inch diameter magnetic resonance imaging guidewire (MRIG) was manufactured for intravascular imaging within a phantom experiment and the coronary artery wall of the swine. For coronary artery wall imaging, both high-resolution images and conventional resolution images were acquired. A 16-channel commercial surface coil for magnetic resonance imaging was employed for the control group. RESULTS: For the phantom experiment, the MRIG showed a higher signal-to-noise ratio than the surface coil. The peak signal-to-noise ratio of the MRIG and the surface coil-generated imaging were 213.6 and 19.8, respectively. The signal-to-noise ratio decreased rapidly as the distance from the MRIG increased. For the coronary artery wall experiment, the vessel wall imaging by the MRIG could be identified clearly, whereas the vessel wall imaging by the surface coil was blurred. The average signal-to-noise ratio of the artery wall was 21.1±5.40 by the MRIG compared to 8.4±2.19 by the surface coil, where the resolution was set at 0.2 mm × 0.2 mm × 2 mm. As expected, the high-resolution sequence clearly showed more details than the conventional resolution sequence set at 0.7 mm × 0.7 mm × 2.0 mm. Histological examination showed no evidence of mechanical injuries in the target vessel walls. CONCLUSIONS: The study validated the feasibility of generating magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 0.2 mm × 0.2 mm × 2 mm for the coronary artery wall using a 0.014 inch MRIG. 2021 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
Authors: L Saba; C Yuan; T S Hatsukami; N Balu; Y Qiao; J K DeMarco; T Saam; A R Moody; D Li; C C Matouk; M H Johnson; H R Jäger; M Mossa-Basha; M E Kooi; Z Fan; D Saloner; M Wintermark; D J Mikulis; B A Wasserman Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-01-11 Impact factor: 3.825