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
Comparative Study
. 2025 Summer;27(1):101863.
doi: 10.1016/j.jocmr.2025.101863. Epub 2025 Feb 14.

How low can we go? The effect of acquisition duration on cardiac volume and function measurements in free-running cardiac and respiratory motion-resolved five-dimensional whole-heart cine magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5T

Affiliations
Comparative Study

How low can we go? The effect of acquisition duration on cardiac volume and function measurements in free-running cardiac and respiratory motion-resolved five-dimensional whole-heart cine magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5T

Robert J Holtackers et al. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2025 Summer.

Abstract

Background: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is the gold standard for assessing cardiac volumes and function using two-dimensional (2D) breath-held cine imaging. This technique, however, requires a reliable electrocardiogram (ECG) signal, repetitive breath-holds, and the time-consuming and proficiency-demanding planning of cardiac views. Recently, a free-running framework has been developed for cardiac and respiratory motion-resolved five-dimensional (5D) whole-heart imaging without the need for an ECG signal, repetitive breath-holds, and meticulous plan scanning. In this study, we investigate the impact of acquisition time on cardiac volumetric and functional measurements, when using free-running imaging, compared to reference standard 2D cine imaging.

Methods: Sixteen healthy adult volunteers underwent CMR at 1.5T, including standard 2D breath-held cine imaging and free-running imaging using acquisition durations ranging from 1 to 6 min in randomized order. All datasets were anonymized and analyzed for left-ventricular end-systolic volume (ESV) and end-diastolic volume (EDV), as well as ejection fraction (EF). In a subset of data, intra- and inter-observer agreement was assessed. In addition, image quality and observer confidence were scored using a 4-point Likert scale. Finally, acquisition efficiency was reported for both imaging techniques, which was defined as the time required for data sampling divided by the total scan time.

Results: No significant differences in left-ventricular EDV and ESV were found between free-running imaging for 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 min and standard 2D breath-held cine imaging. Biases in EDV ranged from -2.4 to -7.4 mL, while biases in ESV ranged from -3.8 to 2.1 mL. No significant differences in EF were found between free-running imaging of any acquisition duration and standard 2D breath-held cine imaging. Biases in EF ranged from -2.8% to 0.94%. Both image quality and observer confidence in free-running imaging improved when the acquisition duration increased. However, they were always lower than standard 2D breath-held cine imaging. Acquisition efficiency improved from 13% for standard 2D cine imaging to 50% or higher for free-running imaging.

Conclusion: Free-running CMR with an acquisition duration as short as 1min can provide left-ventricular cardiac volumes and EF comparable to standard 2D breath-held cine imaging, albeit at the expense of both image quality and observer confidence.

Keywords: 5D; CMR; Cardiac MRI; Free-breathing; Free-running; Self-gating.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interests The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests. Robert J. Holtackers reports financial support was provided by Niels Stensen Fellowship. Ruud B. van Heeswijk, Christopher W. Roy, Jerome Yerly, and Matthias Stuber report financial support was provided by Swiss National Science Foundation. Ludovica Romanin reports a relationship with Siemens Healthcare that includes: employment. Matthias Stuber reports a relationship with Siemens Healthcare that includes non-financial support. Ruud B. Van Heeswijk is an associate editor of JCMR. Matthias Stuber is a senior advisor of JCMR. The other authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

ga1
Graphical abstract
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Schematic overview of the free-running framework. This framework consists of a 1) continuous 3D radial acquisition with a spiral phyllotaxis readout, 2) self-gating signal extraction using principal component analysis and SOBI, 3) data sorting and binning using the cardiac and respiratory self-gating signals, 4) CS reconstruction, and 5) data reformatting using the standard clinical 2D cine geometries. SOBI second-order blind identification, SG self-gated, SI superior-inferior, CS compressed sensing, 2D two-dimensional, 3D, three-dimensional
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Image examples acquired using reference standard 2D breath-held cine imaging and as derived from the 3D free-running acquisitions using different scan durations (1 to 6 min). Various short-axis (from base to apex) and long-axis (both left-ventricular two-chamber and four-chamber) cardiac views are shown, all in the end-diastolic phase of the cardiac cycle. Note that the 2D cine images have an 8 mm slice thickness compared to the 1.4 mm reformats of the free-running cine images. 2D two-dimensional, 3D, three-dimensional
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Correlation plots and Bland–Altman analysis of the left-ventricular ejection fractions as derived from free-running cine using various durations (1–6 min) compared to reference standard 2D breath-held cine imaging. The solid red line and red shaded area in each Bland–Altman plot indicate the bias with its 95% confidence interval, while the black dotted lines indicate the limits of agreement. All axes indicate absolute percentages. 2D two-dimensional
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Bar plots indicating the Likert scale score frequencies for both overall image quality (upper panel) and observer confidence in segmentation (lower panel) for free-running cine imaging using various acquisition durations (1 to 6 min) and reference standard 2D cine imaging. For each type of acquisition, the average score is indicated. The asterisks indicate a significant difference compared to reference standard 2D cine imaging. 2D two-dimensional

References

    1. Kramer C.M., Barkhausen J., Bucciarelli-Ducci C., Flamm S.D., Kim R.J., Nagel E. Standardized cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) protocols: 2020 update. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020;22(1):17. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ismail T.F., Strugnell W., Coletti C., Bozic-Iven M., Weingartner S., Hammernik K., et al. Cardiac MR: from theory to practice. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9 - PMC - PubMed
    1. von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff F., Schulz-Menger J. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology: a comprehensive summary and update. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2023;25(1):42. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nussbaumer C., Bouchardy J., Blanche C., Piccini D., Pavon A.G., Monney P., et al. 2D cine vs. 3D self-navigated free-breathing high-resolution whole heart cardiovascular magnetic resonance for aortic root measurements in congenital heart disease. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2021;23(1):65. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Holtackers R.J., Stuber M. Free-running cardiac and respiratory motion-resolved imaging: a paradigm shift for managing motion in cardiac MRI? Diagnostics. 2024;14(17):1946. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources