T1-mapping in the heart: accuracy and precision

By Peter Kellman, Michael S. Hansen. Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2014

682 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The longitudinal relaxation time constant (T1) of the myocardium is altered in various disease states due to increased water content or other changes to the local molecular environment. Changes in both native T1 and T1 following administration of gadolinium (Gd) based contrast agents are considered important biomarkers and multiple methods have been suggested for quantifying myocardial T1 in vivo. Characterization of the native T1 of myocardial tissue may be used to detect and assess various cardiomyopathies while measurement of T1 with extracellular Gd based contrast agents provides additional information about the extracellular volume (ECV) fraction. The latter is particularly valuable for more diffuse diseases that are more challenging to detect using conventional late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). Both T1 and ECV measures have been shown to have important prognostic significance.T1-mapping has the potential to detect and quantify diffuse fibrosis at an early stage provided that the measurements have adequate reproducibility. Inversion recovery methods such as MOLLI have excellent precision and are highly reproducible when using tightly controlled protocols. The MOLLI method is widely available and is relatively mature. The accuracy of inversion recovery techniques is affected significantly by magnetization transfer (MT). Despite this, the estimate of apparent T1 using inversion recovery is a sensitive measure, which has been demonstrated to be a useful tool in characterizing tissue and discriminating disease. Saturation recovery methods have the potential to provide a more accurate measurement of T1 that is less sensitive to MT as well as other factors. Saturation recovery techniques are, however, noisier and somewhat more artifact prone and have not demonstrated the same level of reproducibility at this point in time.This review article focuses on the technical aspects of key T1-mapping methods and imaging protocols and describes their limitations including the factors that influence their accuracy, precision, and reproducibility.

Subfields: Materials Chemistry, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0264ef10d6163d85f867fa920670f7c0d31b5cce

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Materials Chemistry

In Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

Citations in the corpus

Clinical recommendations for cardiovascular magnetic resonance mapping of T1, T2, T2* and extracellular volume: A consensus statement by the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) endorsed by the European Association for Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) (2017, methodology): “Saturation-based approaches typically use a single image acquisition per preparation pulse, minimizing the complex magnetization history of the Look-Locker approaches, and largely eliminating sensitivity to MT, T2, heart rate and off-resonance effects at the price of reduced precision [10, 15, 16].”
Cardiac T1 Mapping and Extracellular Volume (ECV) in clinical practice: a comprehensive review (2016, background): “The differences in acquisition schemes have a direct effect on the range of normal and abnormal T1 with a given technique [10], which means that absolute T1 values can only be directly compared when they were obtained with the same acquisition scheme at the same field strength using the same post-pr”
Magnetic resonance multitasking for motion-resolved quantitative cardiovascular imaging (2018, neutral): “Because MOLLI is known to be reproducible but not necessarily accurate for T 1 mapping 30, 31 , IR-FLASH multitasking was also compared to ground truth measurements in ten phantom vials placed along the chest of a healthy volunteer.”
Scan-specific Robust Artificial-neural-networks for k-space Interpolation (RAKI) Reconstruction: Database-free Deep Learning for Fast Imaging (2018, methodology): “40,41 For these quantitative MRI data sets, the spatial variability of the T 1 times in the homogenous muscle tissue of the myocardium were used as a surrogate for noise performance 42 for both reconstruction methods.”