Why the study?
Does retrospective triggering compared to prospective triggering yield comparable image quality and functional indices in mouse cardiac MRI?
Does retrospective triggering compared to prospective triggering yield comparable image quality and functional indices in mouse cardiac MRI?
Retrospective triggering in mouse cardiac MRI eliminates the need for ECG and respiratory sensors while providing comparable functional indices to prospective methods, despite lower SNR and CNR.
Retrospective triggering may simplify mouse cardiac MRI; leaves open whether lower SNR/CNR affects advanced or translational endpoints.
High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has evolved into one of the major non-invasive tools to study the healthy and diseased mouse heart. This study presents a Cartesian CINE MRI protocol based on a fast low-angle shot sequence with a navigator echo to generate cardiac triggering and respiratory gating signals retrospectively, making the use of ECG leads and respiratory motion sensors obsolete. MRI of the in vivo mouse heart using this sequence resulted in CINE images with no detectable cardiac and respiratory motion artefacts. The retrospective method allows for steady-state imaging of the mouse heart, which is essential for quantitative contrast-enhanced MRI studies. A comparison was made between prospective and retrospective methods in terms of the signal-to-noise ratio and the contrast-to-noise ratio between blood and myocardial wall, as well as global cardiac functional indices: end-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume, stroke volume and ejection fraction. The retrospective method resulted in almost constant left-ventricle wall signal intensity throughout the cardiac cycle, at the expense of a decrease in the signal-to-noise ratio and the contrast-to-noise ratio between blood and myocardial wall as compared with the prospective method. Prospective and retrospective sequences yielded comparable global cardiac functional indices. The largest mean relative difference found was 8% for the end-systolic volume.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heijman et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: