Cardiac chamber quantification using magnetic resonance imaging at 7 Tesla—a pilot study

ObjectivesInterest in cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) at 7 T is motivated by the expected increase in spatial and temporal resolution, but the method is technically challenging. We examined the feasibility of cardiac chamber quantification at 7 T.MethodsA stack of short axes covering the left ventricle was obtained in nine healthy male volunteers. At 1.5 T, steady-state free precession (SSFP) and fast gradient echo (FGRE) cine imaging with 7 mm slice thickness (STH) were used. At 7 T, FGRE with 7 mm and 4 mm STH were applied. End-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume, ejection fraction and mass were calculated.ResultsAll 7 T examinations provided excellent blood/myocardium contrast for all slice directions. No significant difference was found regarding ejection fraction and cardiac volumes between SSFP at 1.5 T and FGRE at 7 T, while volumes obtained from FGRE at 1.5 T were underestimated. Cardiac mass derived from FGRE at 1.5 and 7 T was larger than obtained from SSFP at 1.5 T. Agreement of volumes and mass between SSFP at 1.5 T and FGRE improved for FGRE at 7 T when combined with an STH reduction to 4 mm.ConclusionsThis pilot study demonstrates that cardiac chamber quantification at 7 T using FGRE is feasible and agrees closely with SSFP at 1.5 T.

[1]  G J Metzger,et al.  Initial results of cardiac imaging at 7 tesla , 2009, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[2]  S. Plein,et al.  Normal human left and right ventricular dimensions for MRI as assessed by turbo gradient echo and steady‐state free precession imaging sequences , 2003, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[3]  D. Pennell,et al.  Breath-hold FLASH and FISP cardiovascular MR imaging: left ventricular volume differences and reproducibility. , 2002, Radiology.

[4]  James C Carr,et al.  ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group, American College of Ra , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  Lawrence L Wald,et al.  Comparison of Cardiac MRI on 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla Clinical Whole Body Systems , 2003, Investigative radiology.

[6]  A G Webb,et al.  Simple RF design for human functional and morphological cardiac imaging at 7tesla. , 2009, Journal of magnetic resonance.

[7]  D. Pennell,et al.  CMR of Ventricular Function , 2007, Echocardiography.

[8]  D. Pennell,et al.  Normalized left ventricular systolic and diastolic function by steady state free precession cardiovascular magnetic resonance. , 2006, Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.

[9]  Caterina Mainero,et al.  In vivo imaging of cortical pathology in multiple sclerosis using ultra-high field MRI , 2009, Neurology.

[10]  Thoralf Niendorf,et al.  Highly accelerated cardiovascular MR imaging using many channel technology: concepts and clinical applications , 2007, European Radiology.

[11]  Manesh R. Patel,et al.  ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[12]  Christoph Butenweg,et al.  Comparison of left ventricular function assessment using phonocardiogram- and electrocardiogram-triggered 2D SSFP CINE MR imaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T , 2010, European Radiology.

[13]  F. von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff,et al.  Feasibility of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance to Assess the Orifice Area of Aortic Bioprostheses , 2009, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[14]  E. Atalar,et al.  Ultimate intrinsic signal‐to‐noise ratio in MRI , 1998, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[15]  Thoralf Niendorf,et al.  Acoustic method for synchronization of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) , 2008 .

[16]  M. Kanowski,et al.  Balanced steady‐state free precession vs. segmented fast low‐angle shot for the evaluation of ventricular volumes, mass, and function at 3 Tesla , 2007, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[17]  Kieran Clarke,et al.  Determination of cardiac volumes and mass with FLASH and SSFP cine sequences at 1.5 vs. 3 Tesla: A validation study , 2006, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[18]  J. Debatin,et al.  MR evaluation of ventricular function: true fast imaging with steady-state precession versus fast low-angle shot cine MR imaging: feasibility study. , 2001, Radiology.

[19]  Peter Andersen,et al.  Whole‐body imaging at 7T: Preliminary results , 2009, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[20]  Peter Boesiger,et al.  Feasibility of Cardiac Gating Free of Interference With Electro-Magnetic Fields at 1.5 Tesla, 3.0 Tesla and 7.0 Tesla Using an MR-Stethoscope , 2009, Investigative radiology.

[21]  R. Pettigrew.  Dynamic cardiac MR imaging. Techniques and applications. , 1989, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[22]  Gerhard Laub,et al.  TrueFISP--technical considerations and cardiovascular applications. , 2003, European journal of radiology.

[23]  David A Bluemke,et al.  Cardiac cine MRI: Quantification of the relationship between fast gradient echo and steady‐state free precession for determination of myocardial mass and volumes , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[24]  S. Plein,et al.  Steady‐state free precession magnetic resonance imaging of the heart: Comparison with segmented k‐space gradient‐echo imaging , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[25]  E. Fleck,et al.  Functional cardiac MR imaging with steady‐state free precession (SSFP) significantly improves endocardial border delineation without contrast agents , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[26]  Peter Boesiger,et al.  Cardiac SSFP imaging at 3 Tesla , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[27]  Thoralf Niendorf,et al.  Comprehensive Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 3.0 Tesla: Feasibility and Implications for Clinical Applications , 2006, Investigative radiology.

[28]  Wei Li,et al.  MR assessment of left ventricular function: Quantitative comparison of fast imaging employing steady‐state acquisition (FIESTA) with fast gradient echo cine technique , 2002, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[29]  Ray F. Lee,et al.  Perspectives on body MR imaging at ultrahigh field. , 2007, Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America.