- Walking poster presentation
- Open Access
Free-breathing real-time cardiac cine MR for evaluation of left-ventricular function: Comparison to standard multi-breath-hold cardiac cine MR in 50 patients
© Nakamura et al. 2016
- Published: 27 January 2016
- Stroke Volume
- Iterative Reconstruction
- Diagnostic Image Quality
- Sparse Sampling
- Cine Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated breath-hold cardiac cine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is generally accepted as the gold standard for left-ventricular (LV) volume assessment. However, it may fail in patients with arrhythmia, impaired breath-hold capacity, and poor ECG gating. Recently, sparse real-time (RT) cine using a prototype sequence with sparse sampling and iterative reconstruction has been proposed to accelerate cine MRI (Kido et al. SCMR; 2015). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic quality and accuracy of sparse free-breathing (FB) RT cine MRI for the quantification of LV function compared with standard multi-breath-hold cine MRI.
50 patients underwent both standard segmented cine MRI (Acc. factor 3) and sparse FB RT cine with a prototype sequence using sparse sampling and iterative reconstruction (acc. factor 12.8) on a clinical 3T MRI scanner (MAGNETOM Skyra, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany). The cine images were obtained in a stack of 8 short-axis slices spanning the entire LV from base to apex (temporal/spatial resolution: 41 ms/1.7 × 1.7 × 6 mm3). The image quality, ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), stroke volume (SV), and LV mass for sparse FB RT cine and standard cine were compared.
All sparse FB RT cine showed acceptable diagnostic image quality. Standard cine and sparse FB RT cine showed good agreement: EF (60.3 ± 10.3% for standard vs. 58.8 ± 10.7% for FB RT; p = 0.09); EDV (132.5 ± 36.7 ml vs. 133.9 ± 33.8 ml; p = 0.51); ESV (54.8 ± 27.4 ml vs. 57.3 ± 27.3 ml; p = 0.09); SV (77.6 ± 15.9 ml vs. 76.6 ± 14.3 ml; p = 0.53); LV mass (87.6 ± 33.7 ml vs. 81.3 ± 31.3 ml; p < 0.001). The intra-observer and inter-observer agreement for all parameters was good.
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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.