Free-breathing non-contrast flow-independent cardiovascular magnetic resonance angiography using cardiac gated, magnetization-prepared 3D Dixon method: assessment of thoracic vasculature in congenital heart disease.
Congenital heart disease
Flow-independent
Free-breathing
Magnetic resonance angiography
Non-contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography
REACT
Thoracic vasculature
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
ISSN: 1532-429X
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9815616
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 07 2021
19 07 2021
Historique:
received:
05
04
2021
accepted:
09
06
2021
entrez:
19
7
2021
pubmed:
20
7
2021
medline:
29
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To evaluate a non-contrast respiratory- and electrocardiogram-gated 3D cardiovascular magnetic resonance angiography (CMRA) based on magnetization-prepared Dixon method (relaxation-enhanced angiography without contrast and triggering, REACT) for the assessment of the thoracic vasculature in congenital heart disease (CHD) patients. 70 patients with CHD (mean 28 years, range: 10-65 years) were retrospectively identified in this single-center study. REACT-CMRA was applied with respiratory- and cardiac-gating. Image quality (IQ) of REACT-CMRA was compared to standard non-gated multi-phase first-pass-CMRA and respiratory- and electrocardiogram-gated steady-state-CMRA. IQ of different vessels of interest (ascending aorta, left pulmonary artery, left superior pulmonary vein, right coronary ostium, coronary sinus) was independently assessed by two readers on a five-point Likert scale. Measurements of vessel diameters were performed in predefined anatomic landmarks (ascending aorta, left pulmonary artery, left superior pulmonary vein). Both readers assessed artifacts and vascular abnormalities. Friedman test, chi-squared test, and Bland-Altman method were used for statistical analysis. Overall IQ score of REACT-CMRA was higher compared to first-pass-CMRA (3.5 ± 0.4 vs. 2.7 ± 0.4, P < 0.001) and did not differ from steady-state-CMRA (3.5 ± 0.4 vs. 3.5 ± 0.6, P = 0.99). Non-diagnostic IQ of the defined vessels of interest was observed less frequently on REACT-CMRA (1.7 %) compared to steady-state- (4.3 %, P = 0.046) or first-pass-CMRA (20.9 %, P < 0.001). Close agreements in vessel diameter measurements were observed between REACT-CMRA and steady-state-CMRA (e.g. ascending aorta, bias: 0.38 ± 1.0 mm, 95 % limits of agreement (LOA): - 1.62-2.38 mm). REACT-CMRA showed high intra- (bias: 0.04 ± 1.0 mm, 95 % LOA: - 1.9-2.0 mm) and interobserver (bias: 0.20 ± 1.1 mm, 95 % LOA: - 2.0-2.4 mm) agreements regarding vessel diameter measurements. Fat-water separation artifacts were observed in 11/70 (16 %) patients on REACT-CMRA but did not limit diagnostic utility. Six vascular abnormalities were detected on REACT-CMRA that were not seen on standard contrast-enhanced CMRA. Non-contrast-enhanced cardiac-gated REACT-CMRA offers a high diagnostic quality for assessment of the thoracic vasculature in CHD patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
To evaluate a non-contrast respiratory- and electrocardiogram-gated 3D cardiovascular magnetic resonance angiography (CMRA) based on magnetization-prepared Dixon method (relaxation-enhanced angiography without contrast and triggering, REACT) for the assessment of the thoracic vasculature in congenital heart disease (CHD) patients.
METHODS
70 patients with CHD (mean 28 years, range: 10-65 years) were retrospectively identified in this single-center study. REACT-CMRA was applied with respiratory- and cardiac-gating. Image quality (IQ) of REACT-CMRA was compared to standard non-gated multi-phase first-pass-CMRA and respiratory- and electrocardiogram-gated steady-state-CMRA. IQ of different vessels of interest (ascending aorta, left pulmonary artery, left superior pulmonary vein, right coronary ostium, coronary sinus) was independently assessed by two readers on a five-point Likert scale. Measurements of vessel diameters were performed in predefined anatomic landmarks (ascending aorta, left pulmonary artery, left superior pulmonary vein). Both readers assessed artifacts and vascular abnormalities. Friedman test, chi-squared test, and Bland-Altman method were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
Overall IQ score of REACT-CMRA was higher compared to first-pass-CMRA (3.5 ± 0.4 vs. 2.7 ± 0.4, P < 0.001) and did not differ from steady-state-CMRA (3.5 ± 0.4 vs. 3.5 ± 0.6, P = 0.99). Non-diagnostic IQ of the defined vessels of interest was observed less frequently on REACT-CMRA (1.7 %) compared to steady-state- (4.3 %, P = 0.046) or first-pass-CMRA (20.9 %, P < 0.001). Close agreements in vessel diameter measurements were observed between REACT-CMRA and steady-state-CMRA (e.g. ascending aorta, bias: 0.38 ± 1.0 mm, 95 % limits of agreement (LOA): - 1.62-2.38 mm). REACT-CMRA showed high intra- (bias: 0.04 ± 1.0 mm, 95 % LOA: - 1.9-2.0 mm) and interobserver (bias: 0.20 ± 1.1 mm, 95 % LOA: - 2.0-2.4 mm) agreements regarding vessel diameter measurements. Fat-water separation artifacts were observed in 11/70 (16 %) patients on REACT-CMRA but did not limit diagnostic utility. Six vascular abnormalities were detected on REACT-CMRA that were not seen on standard contrast-enhanced CMRA.
CONCLUSIONS
Non-contrast-enhanced cardiac-gated REACT-CMRA offers a high diagnostic quality for assessment of the thoracic vasculature in CHD patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34275486
doi: 10.1186/s12968-021-00788-3
pii: 10.1186/s12968-021-00788-3
pmc: PMC8287681
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
91Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012 Aug;36(2):286-304
pubmed: 22807222
Magn Reson Imaging. 2019 Nov;63:137-146
pubmed: 31425807
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 Mar;27(3):504-9
pubmed: 18307199
Invest Radiol. 2008 Jun;43(6):411-20
pubmed: 18496046
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010 May;3(5):504-13
pubmed: 20466346
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020 Dec 14;22(1):87
pubmed: 33308262
Eur Radiol. 2020 Nov;30(11):5794-5804
pubmed: 32506262
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016 Oct;17(10):1071-97
pubmed: 27655864
Heart. 2015 Dec;101(24):1989-95
pubmed: 26541168
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2019 Aug 8;21(1):52
pubmed: 31391061
Eur Heart J. 2010 May;31(10):1220-9
pubmed: 20207625
Magn Reson Med. 2015 May;73(5):1926-31
pubmed: 24911325
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017 Jun 30;19(1):48
pubmed: 28662717
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020 Jan 23;22(1):8
pubmed: 31969137
Radiology. 2009 Mar;250(3):932-9
pubmed: 19164696
Eur Radiol. 2003 Nov;13(11):2409-18
pubmed: 12928954
Circ Res. 2017 Mar 17;120(6):908-922
pubmed: 28302739
Clin Imaging. 2021 Jun;74:149-155
pubmed: 33607595
Magn Reson Med. 2014 Jan;71(1):156-63
pubmed: 23400853
Lancet Neurol. 2017 Jul;16(7):564-570
pubmed: 28653648
Pediatr Radiol. 2018 Aug;48(9):1188-1196
pubmed: 30078039
Circulation. 2016 Jun 21;133(25):2716-33
pubmed: 27324366
Clin Neuroradiol. 2020 Oct 7;:
pubmed: 33026511
Radiology. 2011 Jul;260(1):105-11
pubmed: 21586680
Radiographics. 2020 Jan-Feb;40(1):153-162
pubmed: 31809230
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021 Jan;37(1):315-329
pubmed: 32852711
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2011 Sep 21;13:51
pubmed: 21936913
Eur Heart J. 2021 Feb 11;42(6):563-645
pubmed: 32860028
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005 Aug;22(2):206-12
pubmed: 16028242
Eur Radiol. 2019 Jul;29(7):3686-3695
pubmed: 31041566
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012 Oct 29;14:75
pubmed: 23107424
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014 Aug;40(2):251-68
pubmed: 24446249