- Poster presentation
- Open Access
Phase analysis and mechanical dispersion perform equally in the detection of myocardial scar on cine magnetic resonance imaging
© Maret et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
- Published: 2 February 2011
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
- Phase Delay
- Radial Measurement
- Myocardial Scar
- Scar Patient
Myocardial contraction is a cyclic event. Contraction delay can be described in terms of mechanical dispersion or phase delay of velocity, displacement and local deformation (strain) of segments in apical views of the left ventricle. Our hypothesis was that an increase in the standard deviation of phase would be seen as a consequence of myocardial scar and that this effect could be comparable to mechanical dispersion.
The aim of the study was to perform phase analysis of wall motion from cine magnetic resonance (MR) images to detect myocardial scar defined with gadolinium enhanced MR.
Thirty patients (3 women and 27 men) were selected based on the presence or absence of extensive scar in the antero- and inferoseptal areas of the left ventricle. The patients were investigated in stable clinical condition, 4-8 weeks post ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. Seventeen had a scar area >75% in at least one anteroseptal segment (scar) and thirteen had scar <1% (non-scar). Velocity, displacement and strain as well as their respective phase delays were measured in the longitudinal direction, tangential to the endocardial outline, and in the radial direction, perpendicular to the tangent.
Phase delay in deformation imaging cine-MRI may be used for detecting the presence of myocardial scar in patient based analysis.
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (<url>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0</url>), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.