PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 23, 2001Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging263 citations

Steady‐state free precession magnetic resonance imaging of the heart: Comparison with segmented k‐space gradient‐echo imaging

View Full Paper
SPSven PleinTBTimothy N. BloomerJRJohn P. Ridgway

Key Result

Steady-state free precession imaging (BFFE) yielded significantly higher ventricular volumes and lower ejection fraction compared to TFE (P < 0.0001), while reducing observer variability.

Key Points

  • To compare the effectiveness of steady-state free precession imaging against segmented k-space gradient-echo imaging for cardiac assessment.
  • Compared imaging techniques in 41 subjects
  • Analyzed volumetric measurements and observer variabilities
  • Evaluated automatic contour detection of cardiac structures
  • With steady-state free precession (BFFE), end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes were significantly higher (P < 0.0001)
  • Interobserver variabilities were lower with BFFE, improving agreement among observers
  • Automatic contour detection of endocardial contours was more successful with BFFE compared to TFE

Study Design

Type

Cross-Sectional (n=41)

Structured PICO

Does steady-state free precession imaging (BFFE) improve observer agreement and automatic contour detection compared to segmented k-space gradient-echo acquisition (TFE) in cardiac MRI?

P
Population
41 subjects undergoing cardiac magnetic resonance imaging
I
Intervention
Steady-state free precession imaging sequence (BFFE = balanced fast field echo)
C
Comparator
Segmented k-space gradient-echo acquisition (TFE = turbo field echo)
O
Outcome
Volumetric measurements, observer variabilities, and automatic contour detectionsurrogate

BFFE improves image quality and reduces observer-dependence for LV volumetric measurements compared to TFE, but yields significantly different absolute values that must be accounted for in clinical practice.

Main Result

p-value: p=< 0.0001

Abstract

Steady-state free precession imaging is a promising technique for cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as it provides improved blood/myocardial contrast in shorter acquisition times compared with conventional gradient-echo acquisition. The better contrast could improve observer agreement and automatic detection of cardiac contours for volumetric assessment of the ventricles, but measurements might differ from those obtained using conventional methods. We compared volumetric measurements, observer variabilities, and automatic contour detection between a steady-state free precession imaging sequence (BFFE = balanced fast field echo) and segmented k-space gradient-echo acquisition (TFE = turbo field echo) in 41 subjects. With BFFE, significantly higher end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes and lower wall thickness, ventricular mass, ejection fraction, and wall motion were observed (P < 0.0001), while interobserver variabilities were lower and automatic contour detection of endocardial contours was more successful. We conclude that the improved image quality of BFFE reduces the observer-dependence of volumetric measurements of the left ventricle (LV) but results in significantly different values in comparison to TFE measurements.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Plein et al. (2001) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (n=41). Steady-state free precession imaging sequence (BFFE) vs. Segmented k-space gradient-echo acquisition (TFE) was evaluated on Volumetric measurements, observer variabilities, and automatic contour detection (p=< 0.0001). Steady-state free precession imaging (BFFE) yielded significantly higher ventricular volumes and lower ejection fraction compared to TFE (P < 0.0001), while reducing observer variability.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a10bb94acd1dbe06464521ahttps://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.1178
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Left Ventricular Mass and Volume: Fast Calculation with Guide-Point Modeling on MR Images2000 · 204 citations
  2. 2Determination of left ventricular mass by magnetic resonance imaging in hearts deformed by acute infarction.1989 · 165 citations
  3. 3Comparison Between Manual and Semiautomated Analysis of Left Ventricular Volume Parameters from Short-Axis MR Images1997 · 221 citations
  4. 4In vivo measurement of myocardial mass using nuclear magnetic resonance imaging1986 · 124 citations
  5. 5Evaluation of left ventricular volume and mass with breath-hold cine MR imaging.1993 · 265 citations