Why the study?
Does a wideband AIR pulse sequence improve cardiac T1 mapping accuracy by reducing image artifacts in the presence of an ICD compared to the original AIR sequence?
Does a wideband AIR pulse sequence improve cardiac T1 mapping accuracy by reducing image artifacts in the presence of an ICD compared to the original AIR sequence?
A novel wideband AIR pulse sequence enables accurate cardiac T1 mapping without significant image artifacts in the presence of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.
May enable T1 mapping in ICD patients; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a wideband arrhythmia-insensitive-rapid (AIR) pulse sequence for cardiac T1 mapping without image artifacts induced by implantable-cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). METHODS: We developed a wideband AIR pulse sequence by incorporating a saturation pulse with wide frequency bandwidth (8.9 kHz) to achieve uniform T1 weighting in the heart with ICD. We tested the performance of original and "wideband" AIR cardiac T1 mapping pulse sequences in phantom and human experiments at 1.5 Tesla. RESULTS: In five phantoms representing native myocardium and blood and postcontrast blood/tissue T1 values, compared with the control T1 values measured with an inversion-recovery pulse sequence without ICD, T1 values measured with original AIR with ICD were considerably lower (absolute percent error > 29%), whereas T1 values measured with wideband AIR with ICD were similar (absolute percent error < 5%). Similarly, in 11 human subjects, compared with the control T1 values measured with original AIR without ICD, T1 measured with original AIR with ICD was significantly lower (absolute percent error > 10.1%), whereas T1 measured with wideband AIR with ICD was similar (absolute percent error < 2.0%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility of a wideband pulse sequence for cardiac T1 mapping without significant image artifacts induced by ICD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hong et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: