Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners

Raman, Fabio; Kawel‐Boehm, Nadine; Gai, Neville; Freed, Melanie; Han, Jing; Liu, Chia Ying; Lima, João A.C.; Bluemke, David A.; Liu, Songtao

doi:10.1186/1532-429x-15-64

Cited by 69 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(43 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the higher precision of MOLLI compared to SR T 1 -mapping, previous studies did not report significant differences in the scan-rescan reproducibility [9, 26]. To add on this, our results show no significant difference in the inter- or intra-observer variability between the methods either.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 59%

“…For MOLLI, ECV-values between 0.25 and 0.27 have been reported at 1.5T [9, 15, 26] and between 0.26 and 0.28 at 3T [26–29]. Furthermore, the slight increase in ECV-values between the two post-contrast time points has been previously observed with MOLLI at 3T [29], and the ECV deviation between the two time points is in agreement with previous reports (0.258–0.272 for times between 10 and 25 min [28].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Myocardial T1-mapping at 3T using saturation-recovery: reference values, precision and comparison with MOLLI

Weingärtner

Meßner

Budjan

et al. 2016

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMyocardial T1-mapping recently emerged as a promising quantitative method for non-invasive tissue characterization in numerous cardiomyopathies. Commonly performed with an inversion-recovery (IR) magnetization preparation at 1.5T, the application at 3T has gained due to increased quantification precision. Alternatively, saturation-recovery (SR) T1-mapping has recently been introduced at 1.5T for improved accuracy.Thus, the purpose of this study is to investigate the robustness and precision of SR T1-mapping at 3T and to establish accurate reference values for native T1-times and extracellular volume fraction (ECV) of healthy myocardium.MethodsBalanced Steady-State Free-Precession (bSSFP) Saturation-Pulse Prepared Heart-rate independent Inversion-REcovery (SAPPHIRE) and Saturation-recovery Single-SHot Acquisition (SASHA) T1-mapping were compared with the Modified Look-Locker inversion recovery (MOLLI) sequence at 3T. Accuracy and precision were studied in phantom. Native and post-contrast T1-times and regional ECV were determined in 20 healthy subjects (10 men, 27 ± 5 years). Subjective image quality, susceptibility artifact rating, in-vivo precision and reproducibility were analyzed.ResultsSR T1-mapping showed <4 % deviation from the spin-echo reference in phantom in the range of T1 = 100–2300 ms. The average quality and artifact scores of the T1-mapping methods were: MOLLI:3.4/3.6, SAPPHIRE:3.1/3.4, SASHA:2.9/3.2; (1: poor - 4: excellent/1: strong - 4: none). SAPPHIRE and SASHA yielded significantly higher T1-times (SAPPHIRE: 1578 ± 42 ms, SASHA: 1523 ± 46 ms), in-vivo T1-time variation (SAPPHIRE: 60.1 ± 8.7 ms, SASHA: 70.0 ± 9.3 ms) and lower ECV-values (SAPPHIRE: 0.20 ± 0.02, SASHA: 0.21 ± 0.03) compared with MOLLI (T1: 1181 ± 47 ms, ECV: 0.26 ± 0.03, Precision: 53.7 ± 8.1 ms). No significant difference was found in the inter-subject variability of T1-times or ECV-values (T1: p = 0.90, ECV: p = 0.78), the observer agreement (inter: p > 0.19; intra: p > 0.09) or consistency (inter: p > 0.07; intra: p > 0.17) between the three methods.ConclusionsSaturation-recovery T1-mapping at 3T yields higher accuracy, comparable inter-subject, inter- and intra-observer variability and less than 30 % precision-loss compared to MOLLI.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12968-016-0302-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 59%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Myocardial T1-mapping at 3T using saturation-recovery: reference values, precision and comparison with MOLLI

Weingärtner

Meßner

Budjan

et al. 2016

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This preliminary evaluation of the GOAL-SNAP sequence indicates a good accuracy profile that is comparable to that of commonly used clinical techniques for cardiac T1 mapping (24,25). Practically, this may not pose a major concern given that test-retest variability always exists (24,25). The present study did not have enough data for us to infer the test-retest reproducibility of the GOAL-SNAP sequence for in vivo vessel wall T1 mapping.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

“…The present study did not have enough data for us to infer the test-retest reproducibility of the GOAL-SNAP sequence for in vivo vessel wall T1 mapping. A study of the modified Look-Locker IR sequence showed a coefficient of variation of 4.3%–4.8% for measuring T1 in phantoms (24). Coolen et al (20) performed vessel wall T1 mapping in six healthy volunteers and reported a coefficient of variation of 11%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carotid Intraplaque Hemorrhage Imaging with Quantitative Vessel Wall T1 Mapping: Technical Development and Initial Experience

Sun

Qiao

et al. 2018

Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To develop a three-dimensional (3D) high-spatial-resolution time-efficient sequence for use in quantitative vessel wall T1 mapping. Materials and Methods A previously described sequence, simultaneous noncontrast angiography and intraplaque hemorrhage (SNAP) imaging, was extended by introducing 3D golden angle radial k-space sampling (GOAL-SNAP). Sliding window reconstruction was adopted to reconstruct images at different inversion delay times (different T1 contrasts) for voxelwise T1 fitting. Phantom studies were performed to test the accuracy of T1 mapping with GOAL-SNAP against a two-dimensional inversion recovery (IR) spin-echo (SE) sequence. In vivo studies were performed in six healthy volunteers (mean age, 27.8 years ± 3.0 [standard deviation]; age range, 24–32 years; five male) and five patients with atherosclerosis (mean age, 66.4 years ± 5.5; range, 60–73 years; five male) to compare T1 measurements between vessel wall sections (five per artery) with and without intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH). Statistical analyses included Pearson correlation coefficient, Bland-Altman analysis, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test with data permutation by subject. Results Phantom T1 measurements with GOAL-SNAP and IR SE sequences showed excellent correlation (R2 = 0.99), with a mean bias of −25.8 msec ± 43.6 and a mean percentage error of 4.3% ± 2.5. Minimum T1 was significantly different between sections with IPH and those without it (mean, 371 msec ± 93 vs 944 msec ± 120; P = .01). Estimated T1 of normal vessel wall and muscle were 1195 msec ± 136 and 1117 msec ± 153, respectively. Conclusion High-spatial-resolution (0.8 mm isotropic) time-efficient (5 minutes) vessel wall T1 mapping is achieved by using the GOAL-SNAP sequence. This sequence may yield more quantitative reproducible biomarkers with which to characterize IPH and monitor its progression.

show abstract

“…There is some evidence that measurement errors are lower at 1.5T than 3T and lower for ECV compared with native T1. 8 Because the ECV and the partition coefficient are ratios, some systematic T1 biases may cancel. However, ECV requires precise T1 measurement over a broader range of values and relies on a second measurement system for the hematocrit (Coulter counter), another potential source of error.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploiting Differences in Myocardial Compartments With Native T1 and Extracellular Volume Fraction for the Diagnosis of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

Schelbert

Moon

2015

Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. At present, establishing native T1 reference ranges is needed for each particular scanner and software version because small variations in T1-mapping methodology can exert significant influence on normal reference ranges. 6 Native T1 decreases with some diseases (fat infiltration and iron overload) and increases in others (fibrosis, edema, and amyloid). In myocardial fibrosis, the native T1 elevation is likely from the interstitial compartment rather than cardiomyocyte compartment, but not definitively known.In contradistinction to native T1, ECV detects diseases limited to the interstitium (including myocardial vasculature). ECV exploits the extracellular nature of gadolinium contrast agents. The concentration of contrast in myocardium relative to the concentration in plasma (not whole blood) is a direct measure of the interstitial space after equilibration, as long as contrast agents are not protein-bound. The relative concentrations are derived from the change in relaxivity (ie, 1/T1) for myocardium and whole blood before and after contrast administration and then multiplying the resultant partition coefficient by (1 -hematocrit). The latter term accounts for the displacement of plasma by erythrocytes and enables computation of plasma contrast concentration from the whole-blood measurement from regions of interest measured from the T1 images.ECV and T1 have their respective limitations. The signal to noise ratio of the biological signal to be detected may be massive in some diseases (iron, Fabry, and amyloid) but smaller in diffuse fibrosis. Small signals are intrinsically harder to detect and more prone to potential biases and difficulties with quality control, particularly between centers. There is some evidence that measurement errors are lower at 1.5T than 3T and lower for ECV compared with native T1. 8 Because the ECV and the partition coefficient are ratios, some systematic T1 biases may cancel. However, ECV requires precise T1 measurement over a broader range of values and relies on a second measurement system for the hematocrit (Coulter counter), another potential source of error. ECV also varies slightly with contrast concentration possibly from water exchange effects in and out of cells. Therefore, variations in gadolinium contrast concentration (which relates to choice of contrast timing and dose) can yield slight differences in ECV values, for example, if double-dose or single-dose contrast is used or if time intervals between contrast bolus and post contrast T1 measures vary significantly.9 Both T1 and ECV can be prone to partial volume error from adjacent tissues (eg, blood) and off resonance, so care must be taken in their measurement.What might occur in myocardial compartments with HCM, particularly early HCM? The authors demonstrate early native T1 changes. This finding, in part, agrees with previous HCM studies, one measuring circulating peripheral biomarkers of fibrosis (presumably myocardial), 10 and another indicating elevations in myocardial ECV associated with increased pro-brain natr...

show abstract

Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners

Cited by 69 publications

References 37 publications

Myocardial T1-mapping at 3T using saturation-recovery: reference values, precision and comparison with MOLLI

Myocardial T1-mapping at 3T using saturation-recovery: reference values, precision and comparison with MOLLI

Carotid Intraplaque Hemorrhage Imaging with Quantitative Vessel Wall T1 Mapping: Technical Development and Initial Experience

Exploiting Differences in Myocardial Compartments With Native T1 and Extracellular Volume Fraction for the Diagnosis of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About