Efficient non-contrast enhanced 3D Cartesian cardiovascular magnetic resonance angiography of the thoracic aorta in 3 min.
Non-rigid motion correction
Thoracic aortic disease
Undersampled Cartesian MRA
iNAV
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:
10 01 2022
10 01 2022
Historique:
received:
09
08
2021
accepted:
15
12
2021
entrez:
10
1
2022
pubmed:
11
1
2022
medline:
27
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The application of cardiovascular magnetic resonance angiography (CMRA) for the assessment of thoracic aortic disease is often associated with prolonged and unpredictable acquisition times and residual motion artefacts. To overcome these limitations, we have integrated undersampled acquisition with image-based navigators and inline non-rigid motion correction to enable a free-breathing, contrast-free Cartesian CMRA framework for the visualization of the thoracic aorta in a short and predictable scan of 3 min. 35 patients with thoracic aortic disease (36 ± 13y, 14 female) were prospectively enrolled in this single-center study. The proposed 3D T2-prepared balanced steady state free precession (bSSFP) sequence with image-based navigator (iNAV) was compared to the clinical 3D T2-prepared bSSFP with diaphragmatic-navigator gating (dNAV), in terms of image acquisition time. Three cardiologists blinded to iNAV vs. dNAV acquisition, recorded image quality scores across four aortic segments and their overall diagnostic confidence. Contrast ratio (CR) and relative standard deviation (RSD) of signal intensity (SI) in the corresponding segments were estimated. Co-axial aortic dimensions in six landmarks were measured by two readers to evaluate the agreement between the two methods, along with inter-observer and intra-observer agreement. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Mann-Whitney U (MWU), Bland-Altman analysis (BAA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used for statistical analysis. The scan time for the iNAV-based approach was significantly shorter (3.1 ± 0.5 min vs. 12.0 ± 3.0 min for dNAV, P = 0.005). Reconstruction was performed inline in 3.0 ± 0.3 min. Diagnostic confidence was similar for the proposed iNAV versus dNAV for all three reviewers (Reviewer 1: 3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 3.8 ± 0.4, P = 0.7; Reviewer 2: 4.0 ± 0.2 vs. 3.9 ± 0.3, P = 0.4; Reviewer 3: 3.8 ± 0.4 vs. 3.7 ± 0.6, P = 0.3). The proposed method yielded higher image quality scores in terms of artefacts from respiratory motion, and non-diagnostic images due to signal inhomogeneity were observed less frequently. While the dNAV approach outperformed the iNAV method in the CR assessment, the iNAV sequence showed improved signal homogeneity along the entire thoracic aorta [RSD SI 5.1 (4.4, 6.5) vs. 6.5 (4.6, 8.6), P = 0.002]. BAA showed a mean difference of < 0.05 cm across the 6 landmarks between the two datasets. ICC showed excellent inter- and intra-observer reproducibility. Thoracic aortic iNAV-based CMRA with fast acquisition (~ 3 min) and inline reconstruction (3 min) is proposed, resulting in high diagnostic confidence and reproducible aortic measurements.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The application of cardiovascular magnetic resonance angiography (CMRA) for the assessment of thoracic aortic disease is often associated with prolonged and unpredictable acquisition times and residual motion artefacts. To overcome these limitations, we have integrated undersampled acquisition with image-based navigators and inline non-rigid motion correction to enable a free-breathing, contrast-free Cartesian CMRA framework for the visualization of the thoracic aorta in a short and predictable scan of 3 min.
METHODS
35 patients with thoracic aortic disease (36 ± 13y, 14 female) were prospectively enrolled in this single-center study. The proposed 3D T2-prepared balanced steady state free precession (bSSFP) sequence with image-based navigator (iNAV) was compared to the clinical 3D T2-prepared bSSFP with diaphragmatic-navigator gating (dNAV), in terms of image acquisition time. Three cardiologists blinded to iNAV vs. dNAV acquisition, recorded image quality scores across four aortic segments and their overall diagnostic confidence. Contrast ratio (CR) and relative standard deviation (RSD) of signal intensity (SI) in the corresponding segments were estimated. Co-axial aortic dimensions in six landmarks were measured by two readers to evaluate the agreement between the two methods, along with inter-observer and intra-observer agreement. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Mann-Whitney U (MWU), Bland-Altman analysis (BAA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
The scan time for the iNAV-based approach was significantly shorter (3.1 ± 0.5 min vs. 12.0 ± 3.0 min for dNAV, P = 0.005). Reconstruction was performed inline in 3.0 ± 0.3 min. Diagnostic confidence was similar for the proposed iNAV versus dNAV for all three reviewers (Reviewer 1: 3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 3.8 ± 0.4, P = 0.7; Reviewer 2: 4.0 ± 0.2 vs. 3.9 ± 0.3, P = 0.4; Reviewer 3: 3.8 ± 0.4 vs. 3.7 ± 0.6, P = 0.3). The proposed method yielded higher image quality scores in terms of artefacts from respiratory motion, and non-diagnostic images due to signal inhomogeneity were observed less frequently. While the dNAV approach outperformed the iNAV method in the CR assessment, the iNAV sequence showed improved signal homogeneity along the entire thoracic aorta [RSD SI 5.1 (4.4, 6.5) vs. 6.5 (4.6, 8.6), P = 0.002]. BAA showed a mean difference of < 0.05 cm across the 6 landmarks between the two datasets. ICC showed excellent inter- and intra-observer reproducibility.
CONCLUSIONS
Thoracic aortic iNAV-based CMRA with fast acquisition (~ 3 min) and inline reconstruction (3 min) is proposed, resulting in high diagnostic confidence and reproducible aortic measurements.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35000609
doi: 10.1186/s12968-021-00839-9
pii: 10.1186/s12968-021-00839-9
pmc: PMC8744314
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
5Subventions
Organisme : British Heart Foundation
ID : FS/CRTF/20/24011
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/L009676/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : NS/A000049/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : British Heart Foundation
ID : PG/18/59/33955
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : British Heart Foundation
ID : FS/20/13/34857
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Department of Health
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
BMJ Open. 2015 Jun 02;5(6):e008147
pubmed: 26038360
Eur J Radiol. 2021 Apr;137:109573
pubmed: 33578090
Magn Reson Med. 2020 Jul;84(1):157-169
pubmed: 31815322
Magn Reson Med. 1995 May;33(5):689-96
pubmed: 7596274
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021 Feb;37(2):651-661
pubmed: 32968888
Magn Reson Med. 2017 May;77(5):1894-1908
pubmed: 27221073
Magn Reson Med. 2013 Nov;70(5):1360-8
pubmed: 23213005
Eur Radiol Exp. 2019 Jul 31;3(1):29
pubmed: 31363865
Magn Reson Med. 2003 Nov;50(5):892-903
pubmed: 14586999
Magn Reson Med. 2012 Aug;68(2):571-9
pubmed: 22213169
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997 May;168(5):1369-75
pubmed: 9129447
Circulation. 2010 Apr 6;121(13):e266-369
pubmed: 20233780
Magn Reson Med. 2017 May;77(5):1874-1883
pubmed: 27174590
Eur Radiol. 2020 Nov;30(11):5794-5804
pubmed: 32506262
Kidney Med. 2020 Nov 10;3(1):142-150
pubmed: 33604544
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020 Apr 16;22(1):24
pubmed: 32299445
Ann Vasc Dis. 2010;3(3):196-201
pubmed: 23555410
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2007 Dec;23(6):747-56
pubmed: 17285264
Magn Reson Med. 2005 Aug;54(2):476-80
pubmed: 16032682
Circulation. 2013 Jan 1;127(1):e6-e245
pubmed: 23239837
Eur Radiol. 2010 Jun;20(6):1311-20
pubmed: 20013276
Eur Radiol. 2006 Mar;16(3):676-84
pubmed: 16249863
J Endovasc Ther. 2015 Dec;22(6):905-11
pubmed: 26384397
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017 Oct 30;19(1):82
pubmed: 29084542
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014 Dec;25(12):1903-11
pubmed: 25066591
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996 Jun;166(6):1387-97
pubmed: 8633452
Front Mol Neurosci. 2018 Sep 20;11:335
pubmed: 30294259
Eur Heart J. 2014 Nov 1;35(41):2873-926
pubmed: 25173340
Future Cardiol. 2008 Jan;4(1):85-96
pubmed: 19804274
Magn Reson Med. 2012 Feb;67(2):437-45
pubmed: 21656563
Magn Reson Imaging. 2021 Feb;76:123-130
pubmed: 33309920
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Jul 15;167(1):190-6
pubmed: 22240770
Magn Reson Med. 2019 Jan;81(1):524-532
pubmed: 30229565
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006 Nov;32(5):532-6
pubmed: 16798028
Eur Radiol. 2016 Apr;26(4):951-8
pubmed: 26188657
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009 Oct;30(4):809-16
pubmed: 19787726
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2009 Jul;32(4):658-65
pubmed: 19434450
Int J Card Imaging. 2000 Jun;16(3):135-47
pubmed: 11144767
Eur J Radiol. 2012 Apr;81(4):762-6
pubmed: 21310568
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2017 May;12(5):811-819
pubmed: 27882488