Interstudy reproducibility of SSFP cine magnetic resonance: Impact of magnetic field strength and parallel imaging

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1139-1145

  Maroules, Christopher D ^a   McColl, Roderick ^a   Khera, Amit ^a   Peshock, Ronald M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

3 Tesla; Cardiovascular MRI; Reproducibility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HUMAN; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; STEADY STATE;

CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, CINE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; VENTRICULAR DYSFUNCTION, LEFT; VENTRICULAR DYSFUNCTION, RIGHT;

EID: 42949084618     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21343     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Barkhausen J, Ruehm SG, Goyen M, Buck T, Laub G, Debatin JF. MR evaluation of ventricular function: true fast imaging with steady-state precession versus fast low-angle shot cine MR imaging: feasibility study. Radiology 2001;219:264-269.
2. Moon JC, Lorenz CH, Francis JM, Smith GC, Pennell DJ. Breathhold FLASH and FISP cardiovascular MR imaging: left ventricular volume differences and reproducibility. Radiology 2002;223:789-797.
3. Grothues F, Moon JC, Bellenger NG, Smith GS, Klein HU, Pennell DJ. Interstudy reproducibility of right ventricular volumes, function, and mass with cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Am Heart J 2004;147:218-223.
4. Grothues F, Smith GC, Moon JC, et al. Comparison of interstudy reproducibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance with two-dimensional echocardiography in normal subjects and in patients with heart failure or left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Cardiol 2002;90:29-34.
5. Kuhl HP, van der Weerdt A, Beek A, Visser F, Hanrath P, van Rossum A. Relation of end-diastolic wall thickness and the residual rim of viable myocardium by magnetic resonance imaging to myocardial viability assessed by fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Am J Cardiol 2006;97:452-457.
6. Gutberiet M, Noeske R, Schwinge K, Freyhardt P, Felix R, Niendorf T. Comprehensive cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 Tesla: feasibility and implications for clinical applications. Invest Radiol 2006;41:154-167.
7. Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P. SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med 1999;42:952-962.
8. Gutberlet M, Schwinge K, Freyhardt P, et al. Influence of high magnetic field strengths and parallel acquisition strategies on image quality in cardiac 2D CINE magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of 1.5 T vs. 3.0T. Eur Radiol 2005;15:1586-1597.
9. Wintersperger BJ, Bauner K, Reeder SB, et al. 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 2006;41:141-147.
10. Henkelman RM. Measurement of signal intensities in the presence of noise in MR images. Med Phys 1985;12:232-233.
11. Reeder SB, Wintersperger BJ, Dietrich O, et al. Practical approaches to the evaluation of signal-to-noise ratio performance with parallel imaging: application with cardiac imaging and a 32-channel cardiac coil. Magn Reson Med 2005;54:748-754.
12. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-310.
13. Quan H, Shih WJ. Assessing reproducibility by the within-subject coefficient of variation with random effects models. Biometrics 1996;52:1195-1203.
14. Yarnykh VL, Terashima M, Hayes CE, et al. Multicontrast blackblood MRI of carotid arteries: comparison between 1.5 and 3 tesla magnetic field strengths. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;23:691-698.
15. Semelka RC, Tomei E, Wagner S, et al. Normal left ventricular dimensions and function: interstudy reproducibility of measurements with cine MR imaging. Radiology 1990;174(3 Pt 1):763-768.
16. Hinton DP, Wald LL, Pitts J, Schmitt F. Comparison of cardiac MRI on 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla clinical whole body systems. Invest Radiol 2003;38:436-442.
17. Victor RG, Haley RW, Willett DL, et al. The Dallas Heart Study: a population-based probability sample for the multidisciplinary study of ethnic differences in cardiovascular health. Am J Cardiol 2004;93:1473-1480.
18. Gutberlet M, Spors B, Grothoff M, et al. Comparison of different cardiac MRI sequences at 1.5 T/3.0 T with respect to signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios - initial experience. Rofo 2004; 176:801-808.
19. Zehender M, Kasper W, Kauder E, et al. Right ventricular infarction as an independent predictor of prognosis after acute inferior myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993;328:981-988.
20. Li W, Storey P, Chen Q, Li BS, Prasad PV, Edelman RR. Dark flow artifacts with steady-state free precession cine MR technique: causes and implications for cardiac MR imaging. Radiology 2004; 230:569-575.
21. Fieno DS, Shea SM, Li Y, Harris KR, Finn JP, Li D. Myocardial perfusion imaging based on the blood oxygen level-dependent effect using T2-prepared steady-state free-precession magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation 2004;110:1284-1290.
22. Parkes LM, Schwarzbach JV, Bouts AA, et al. Quantifying the spatial resolution of the gradient echo and spin echo BOLD response at 3 Tesla. Magn Reson Med 2005;54:1465-1472.
23. Nesser HJ, Tkalec W, Patel AR, et al. Quantitation of right ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by three-dimensional echocardiography in patients: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging and radionuclide ventriculography. Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, NY) 2006;23:666-680.
24. Semelka RC, Tomei E, Wagner S, et al. Interstudy reproducibility of dimensional and functional measurements between cine magnetic resonance studies in the morphologically abnormal left ventricle. Am Heart J 1990;119:1367-1373.
25. Kacere RD, Pereyra M, Nemeth MA, Muthupillai R, Flamm SD. Quantitative assessment of left ventricular function: steady-state free precession MR imaging with or without sensitivity encoding. Radiology 2005;235:1031-1035.
26. Mascarenhas NB, Muthupillai R, Cheong B, Pereyra M, Flamm SD. Fast 3D cine steady-state free precession imaging with sensitivity encoding for assessment of left ventricular function in a single breath-hold. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:1235-1239.
27. Hudsmith LE, Petersen SE, Tyler DJ, et al. Determination of cardiac volumes and mass with FLASH and SSFP cine sequences at 1.5 vs. 3 Tesla: a validation study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:312-318.
28. Bellenger NG, Davies LC, Francis JM, Coats AJ, Pennell DJ. Reduction in sample size for studies of remodeling in heart failure by the use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2000;2:271-278.
29. Griswold MA, Jakob PM, Heidemann RM, et al. Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA). Magn Reson Med 2002;47:1202-1210.
30. Jahnke C, Paetsch I, Gebker R, Bornstedt A, Fleck E, Nagel E. Accelerated 4D dobutamine stress MR imaging with k-t BLAST: feasibility and diagnostic performance. Radiology 2006;241:718-728.