Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Apr;74(4):325.e9-325.e17.
doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2018.12.012. Epub 2019 Jan 25.

Compressed SENSE single-breath-hold and free-breathing cine imaging for accelerated clinical evaluation of the left ventricle

Affiliations

Compressed SENSE single-breath-hold and free-breathing cine imaging for accelerated clinical evaluation of the left ventricle

Y Ma et al. Clin Radiol. 2019 Apr.

Abstract

Aim: To assess the accuracy of compressed SENSE (CS-SENSE) cine cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) with and without breath-hold in comparison to standard cine CMR with breath-hold for the assessment of left ventricular (LV) function.

Materials and methods: Thirty-three healthy volunteers underwent balanced turbo field-echo cine CMR with breath-hold (BTFE-BH; reference standard), single breath-hold CS-SENSE (csBTFE-BH) cine CMR, and free-breathing (FB) CS-SENSE (csBTFE-FB) cine CMR on a 3 T MRI system. All images were acquired in stacks of eight short-axis sections. Image quality was assessed and compared by the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test. End-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume, stroke volume, ejection fraction, LV end-diastolic (LVED) mass, regional myocardial wall motion, and scan time were compared by paired t-test, linear regression, and Bland-Altman analyses.

Results: All techniques provided acceptable image quality (score ≥3) for LV volumetric analysis in all participants (BTFE-BH [reference standard]: 5.00±0.00; csBTFE-BH: 4.03±0.17 [p<0.001]; csBTFE-FB: 3.76±0.44 [p<0.001]), with good agreement in LV function assessment; however, there was a slight but significant underestimation of LVED mass by csBTFE-FB (csBTFE-FB: 73.63±17.31 g versus BTFE-BH [reference standard]: 75.12±18.18 g, p=0.037). All methods showed a strong correlation with quantitative regional myocardial wall motion. Acquisition times for both csBTFE-BH and csBTFE-FB were significantly shorter than that for BTFE-BH (BTFE-BH [reference standard]: 89.3±5.70 seconds; csBTFE-BH: 24.42±2.18 seconds [p<0.001]; csBTFE-FB: 22.48±1.85 seconds [p<0.001]).

Conclusion: LV function assessment with the novel CS-SENSE cine CMR is not inferior to standard cine CMR, irrespective of BH; however, LVED mass is underestimated by csBTFE-FB.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources