A 72-channel receive array coil allows whole-heart cine MRI in two breath holds
Tóm tắt
A new 72-channel receive array coil and sensitivity encoding, compressed (C-SENSE) and noncompressed (SENSE), were investigated to decrease the number of breath-holds (BHs) for cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Three-T CMRs were performed using the 72-channel coil with SENSE-2/4/6 and C-SENSE-2/4/6 accelerated short-axis cine two-dimensional balanced steady-state free precession sequences. A 16-channel coil with SENSE-2 served as reference. Ten healthy subjects were included. BH-time was kept under 15 s. Data were compared in terms of image quality, biventricular function, number of BHs, and scan times. BHs decreased from 7 with C-SENSE-2 (scan time 70 s, 2 slices/BH) to 3 with C-SENSE-4 (scan time 42 s, 4–5 slices/BH) and 2 with C-SENSE-6 (scan time 28 s, 7 slices/BH). Compared to reference, image sharpness was similar for SENSE-2/4/6, slightly inferior for C-SENSE-2/4/6. Blood-to-myocardium contrast was unaffected. C-SENSE-4/6 was given lower qualitative median scores, but images were considered diagnostically adequate to excellent, with C-SENSE-6 suboptimal. Biventricular end-diastolic (EDV), end-systolic (ESV) and stroke volumes, ejection fractions (EF), cardiac outputs, and left ventricle (LV)-mass were similar for SENSE-2/4/6 with no systematic bias and clinically appropriate limits of agreements. C-SENSE slightly underestimated LV-EDV (-6.38 ± 6.0 mL, p < 0.047), LV-ESV (-7.94 ± 6.0 mL, p < 0.030) and overestimated LV-EF (3.16 ± 3.10%; p < 0.047) with C-SENSE-4. Bland-Altman analyses revealed minor systematic biases in these variables with C-SENSE-2/4/6 and for LV-mass with C-SENSE-6. Using the 72-channel coil, short-axis CMR for quantifying biventricular function was feasible in two BHs where SENSE slightly outperformed C-SENSE.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Constantine G, Shan K, Flamm SD, Sivananthan MU (2004) Role of MRI in clinical cardiology. Lancet. 363:2162–2171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16509-4
White HD, Norris RM, Brown MA, Brandt PWT, Whitlock RML, Wild CJ (1987) Left-Ventricular End-Systolic Volume as the Major Determinant of Survival after Recovery from Myocardial-Infarction. Circulation. 76:44–51. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.Cir.76.1.44
Sechtem U, Pflugfelder PW, White RD, et al (1987) Cine MR imaging: potential for the evaluation of cardiovascular function. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 148:239–246. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.148.2.239
Pontone G, Guaricci AI, Andreini D, et al (2017) Prognostic Stratification of Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (PROSPECT): A Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 10. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.117.006428
Curtis JP, Sokol SI, Wang YF, et al (2003) The association of left ventricular ejection fraction, mortality, and cause of death in stable outpatients with heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 42:736–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00789-7
Kramer CM, Barkhausen J, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Flamm SD, Kim RJ, Nagel E (2020) Standardized cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) protocols: 2020 update. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 22:17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-020-00607-1
Plein S, Bloomer TN, Ridgway JP, Jones TR, Bainbridge GJ, Sivananthan MU (2001) Steady-state free precession magnetic resonance imaging of the heart: Comparison with segmented K-space gradient-echo imaging. J Magnet Reson Imaging. 14:230–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.1178
Thiele H, Nagel E, Paetsch I, et al (2001) Functional cardiac MR imaging with steady-state free precession (SSFP) significantly improves endocardial border delineation without contrast agents. J Magnet Reson Imaging. 14:362–367. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.1195
Alfakih K, Thiele H, Plein S, Bainbridge GJ, Ridgway JP, Sivananthan MU (2002) Comparison of right ventricular volume measurement between segmented K-space gradient-echo and steady-state free precession magnetic resonance Imaging. J Magnet Reson Imaging. 16:253–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.10164
Schar M, Kozerke S, Fischer SE, Boesiger P (2004) Cardiac SSFP imaging at 3 tesla. Magn Reson Med. 51:799–806. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.20024
Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P (1999) SENSE: Sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med. 42:952–962. https://doi.org/10.1002/(Sici)1522-2594(199911)42:5<952::Aid-Mrm16>3.3.Co;2-J
Wintersperger BJ, Bauner K, Reeder SB, et al (2006) Cardiac steady-state free precession CINE magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 tesla: impact of parallel imaging acceleration on volumetric accuracy and signal parameters. Invest Radiol. 41:141–147. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.rli.0000192419.08733.37
Lustig M, Donoho D, Pauly JM (2007) Sparse MRI: The application of compressed sensing for rapid MR imaging. Magn Reson Med. 58:1182–1195. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.21391
Goebel J, Nensa F, Schemuth HP, et al (2016) Compressed sensing cine imaging with high spatial or high temporal resolution for analysis of left ventricular function. J Magn Reson Imaging. 44:366–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25162
Kocaoglu M, Pednekar AS, Wang H, Alsaied T, Taylor MD, Rattan MS (2020) Breath-hold and free-breathing quantitative assessment of biventricular volume and function using compressed SENSE: a clinical validation in children and young adults. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-020-00642-y
Lin ACW, Strugnell W, Riley R, et al (2017) Higher resolution cine imaging with compressed sensing for accelerated clinical left ventricular evaluation. J Magn Reson Imaging. 45:1693–1699. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25525
Ma Y, Hou Y, Ma Q, Wang X, Sui S, Wang B (2019) Compressed SENSE single-breath-hold and free-breathing cine imaging for accelerated clinical evaluation of the left ventricle. Clin Radiol. 74:e9–e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2018.12.012
Vincenti G, Monney P, Chaptinel J, et al (2014) Compressed sensing single-breath-hold CMR for fast quantification of LV function, volumes, and mass. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 7:882–892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2014.04.016
Gruber B, Hendriks AD, Alborahal CBD (2017) The potential of a 256-channel receive-only array coil for accelerated cardiac imaging at 3T. ISMRM 25th Annual Meeting & Exhibition
Gruber B, Froeling M, Leiner T, Klomp DWJ (2018) RF coils: A practical guide for nonphysicists. J Magn Reson Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26187
Schmitt M, Potthast A, Sosnovik DE, et al (2008) A 128-channel receive-only cardiac coil for highly accelerated cardiac MRI at 3 tesla. Magn Reson Med. 59:1431–1439. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.21598
Zhang T, Grafendorfer T, Cheng JY, et al (2016) A Semiflexible 64-Channel Receive-Only Phased Array for Pediatric Body MRI at 3T. Magn Reson Med. 76:1015–1021. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.25999
Gosselink M, Klarenberg H, Lamb HJ, et al (2019) Highly accelerated cardiac imaging using a high-density 72 channel local receiver array at 3 Tesla. ISMRM 27th annual meeting & exhibition
Kawel-Boehm N, Hetzel SJ, Ambale-Venkatesh B, et al (2020) Reference ranges (“normal values”) for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in adults and children: 2020 update. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-020-00683-3
Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical Methods for Assessing Agreement between Two Methods of Clinical Measurement. Lancet. 1:307–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8
Giavarina D (2015) Understanding Bland Altman analysis. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 25:141–151. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2015.015
Medcalc manual. (Accessed 1 Aug 2021.) Available at: http://www.medcalc.org/manual/t-distibution.php
Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the False Discovery Rate - a Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. J R Stat Soc Series B-Statistical Methodol. 57:289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
Danilouchkine MG, Westenberg JJM, de Roos A, Reiber JHC, Lelieveldt BPF (2005) Operator induced variability in cardiovascular MR: left ventricular measurements and their reproducibility. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 7:447–457. https://doi.org/10.1081/Jcmr-200053578
Gomez-Talavera S, Fernandez-Jimenez R, Fuster V, et al (2021) Clinical Validation of a 3-Dimensional Ultrafast Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Protocol Including Single Breath-Hold 3-Dimensional Sequences. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2021.02.031
Wetzl J, Schmidt M, Pontana F, et al (2018) Single-breath-hold 3-D CINE imaging of the left ventricle using Cartesian sampling. MAGMA. 31:19–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-017-0624-1
Wech T, Pickl W, Tran-Gia J, et al (2014) Whole-heart cine MRI in a single breath-hold--a compressed sensing accelerated 3D acquisition technique for assessment of cardiac function. Rofo. 186:37–41. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1350521
Hamilton J, Franson D, Seiberlich N (2017) Recent advances in parallel imaging for MRI. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc. 101:71–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnmrs.2017.04.002
Ferreira PF, Gatehouse PD, Mohiaddin RH, Firmin DN (2013) Cardiovascular magnetic resonance artefacts. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 15:41. https://doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-15-41