Cargando…
Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 mapping indices, such as T1 time and partition coefficient (λ), have shown potential to assess diffuse myocardial fibrosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate how scanner and field strength variation affect the accuracy and precision/r...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3733695/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23890156 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-15-64 |
_version_ | 1782279388033712128 |
---|---|
author | Raman, Fabio S Kawel-Boehm, Nadine Gai, Neville Freed, Melanie Han, Jing Liu, Chia-Ying Lima, Joao AC Bluemke, David A Liu, Songtao |
author_facet | Raman, Fabio S Kawel-Boehm, Nadine Gai, Neville Freed, Melanie Han, Jing Liu, Chia-Ying Lima, Joao AC Bluemke, David A Liu, Songtao |
author_sort | Raman, Fabio S |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 mapping indices, such as T1 time and partition coefficient (λ), have shown potential to assess diffuse myocardial fibrosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate how scanner and field strength variation affect the accuracy and precision/reproducibility of T1 mapping indices. METHODS: CMR studies were performed on two 1.5T and three 3T scanners. Eight phantoms were made to mimic the T1/T2 of pre- and post-contrast myocardium and blood at 1.5T and 3T. T1 mapping using MOLLI was performed with simulated heart rate of 40-100 bpm. Inversion recovery spin echo (IR-SE) was the reference standard for T1 determination. Accuracy was defined as the percent error between MOLLI and IR-SE, and scan/re-scan reproducibility was defined as the relative percent mean difference between repeat MOLLI scans. Partition coefficient was estimated by ΔR1myocardium phantom/ΔR1blood phantom. Generalized linear mixed model was used to compare the accuracy and precision/reproducibility of T1 and λ across field strength, scanners, and protocols. RESULTS: Field strength significantly affected MOLLI T1 accuracy (6.3% error for 1.5T vs. 10.8% error for 3T, p<0.001) but not λ accuracy (8.8% error for 1.5T vs. 8.0% error for 3T, p=0.11). Partition coefficients of MOLLI were not different between two 1.5T scanners (47.2% vs. 47.9%, p=0.13), and showed only slight variation across three 3T scanners (49.2% vs. 49.8% vs. 49.9%, p=0.016). Partition coefficient also had significantly lower percent error for precision (better scan/re-scan reproducibility) than measurement of individual T1 values (3.6% for λ vs. 4.3%-4.8% for T1 values, approximately, for pre/post blood and myocardium values). CONCLUSION: Based on phantom studies, T1 errors using MOLLI ranged from 6-14% across various MR scanners while errors for partition coefficient were less (6-10%). Compared with absolute T1 times, partition coefficient showed less variability across platforms and field strengths as well as higher precision. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3733695 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37336952013-08-06 Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners Raman, Fabio S Kawel-Boehm, Nadine Gai, Neville Freed, Melanie Han, Jing Liu, Chia-Ying Lima, Joao AC Bluemke, David A Liu, Songtao J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Research BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 mapping indices, such as T1 time and partition coefficient (λ), have shown potential to assess diffuse myocardial fibrosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate how scanner and field strength variation affect the accuracy and precision/reproducibility of T1 mapping indices. METHODS: CMR studies were performed on two 1.5T and three 3T scanners. Eight phantoms were made to mimic the T1/T2 of pre- and post-contrast myocardium and blood at 1.5T and 3T. T1 mapping using MOLLI was performed with simulated heart rate of 40-100 bpm. Inversion recovery spin echo (IR-SE) was the reference standard for T1 determination. Accuracy was defined as the percent error between MOLLI and IR-SE, and scan/re-scan reproducibility was defined as the relative percent mean difference between repeat MOLLI scans. Partition coefficient was estimated by ΔR1myocardium phantom/ΔR1blood phantom. Generalized linear mixed model was used to compare the accuracy and precision/reproducibility of T1 and λ across field strength, scanners, and protocols. RESULTS: Field strength significantly affected MOLLI T1 accuracy (6.3% error for 1.5T vs. 10.8% error for 3T, p<0.001) but not λ accuracy (8.8% error for 1.5T vs. 8.0% error for 3T, p=0.11). Partition coefficients of MOLLI were not different between two 1.5T scanners (47.2% vs. 47.9%, p=0.13), and showed only slight variation across three 3T scanners (49.2% vs. 49.8% vs. 49.9%, p=0.016). Partition coefficient also had significantly lower percent error for precision (better scan/re-scan reproducibility) than measurement of individual T1 values (3.6% for λ vs. 4.3%-4.8% for T1 values, approximately, for pre/post blood and myocardium values). CONCLUSION: Based on phantom studies, T1 errors using MOLLI ranged from 6-14% across various MR scanners while errors for partition coefficient were less (6-10%). Compared with absolute T1 times, partition coefficient showed less variability across platforms and field strengths as well as higher precision. BioMed Central 2013-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC3733695/ /pubmed/23890156 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-15-64 Text en Copyright © 2013 Raman et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Raman, Fabio S Kawel-Boehm, Nadine Gai, Neville Freed, Melanie Han, Jing Liu, Chia-Ying Lima, Joao AC Bluemke, David A Liu, Songtao Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners |
title | Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners |
title_full | Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners |
title_fullStr | Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners |
title_full_unstemmed | Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners |
title_short | Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners |
title_sort | modified look-locker inversion recovery t1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3733695/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23890156 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-15-64 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ramanfabios modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners AT kawelboehmnadine modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners AT gaineville modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners AT freedmelanie modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners AT hanjing modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners AT liuchiaying modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners AT limajoaoac modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners AT bluemkedavida modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners AT liusongtao modifiedlooklockerinversionrecoveryt1mappingindicesassessmentofaccuracyandreproducibilitybetweenmagneticresonancescanners |