Comparison of left and right ventricular dimensions, systolic and diastolic function between 1.0T Open MRI and 1.5T cyli
- PDF / 339,656 Bytes
- 2 Pages / 595.28 x 793.7 pts Page_size
- 75 Downloads / 194 Views
POSTER PRESENTATION
Open Access
Comparison of left and right ventricular dimensions, systolic and diastolic function between 1.0T Open MRI and 1.5T cylindrical MRI Philip G Petry2, Nina P Hofmann1, Florian Andre1, Henning Steen1* From 15th Annual SCMR Scientific Sessions Orlando, FL, USA. 2-5 February 2012 Background Cardiac MRI is the reference standard for cardiac morphology and functional assessment of left and right ventricular (LV,RV) end-diastolic and -systolic volumes (EDV, ESV), stroke volume (SV), ejection fraction (EF) and myocardial mass (Mass) due to its high image resolution tissue differentiation. Because of its cylindrical shape and resulting spatial restrictions, a significant amount of obese and claustrophobic patients, at least 10-15%, cannot be studied at all or only with higher amounts of sedation. Recently, 1.0T open MRI, which offers more space due to its different magnet architecture, has been introduced mainly for orthopaedic purposes but until now has rarely been used for cardiovascular functional measurements. We sought to investigate the performance of 1.0T open MRI for cardiovascular function and to compare LV- and RV-EDV, -ESV, -SV, -EF, longitudinal RV and LV function and Mass for both 1.0 and 1.5T. Methods Eight volunteers (all male, 27±3ys) were scanned twice within 1.5hours randomly both on the 1.5T (Philips 1.5T Achieva) and the 1.0T (Philips 1.0T Panorama high field open). 1.5T and 1.0T cine SSFP (1.5T:TR/TE=3.5/ min,Flip-angle=40°, resolution:1.7*1.8*8mm,slice-thickness=8mm,30heart-phases; HFO 1.0T:TR/TE: 4.7/2.2 msec,flip-angle:70°,resolution:1.8×2×8mm3,slice-thickness=8mm, 30 heart phases) were performed to assess LV- and RV-EDV, -ESV, -SV, -EF and Mass. Mitral annular plane systolic excursion (MAPSE) and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) where
measured comparable to echocardiography. All images were compared by two blinded observers on a workstation (Philips Viewforum). P
Data Loading...
