Why the study?
Does the raMOLLI sequence improve the speed and accuracy of myocardial T1 mapping compared to conventional MOLLI?
Does the raMOLLI sequence improve the speed and accuracy of myocardial T1 mapping compared to conventional MOLLI?
The raMOLLI sequence with FLASH readout enables ultrafast (five heartbeats), accurate, and precise myocardial T1 mapping.
May streamline cardiac MRI workflows by reducing breath-hold times; leaves open whether this.
Purpose Quantitative cardiac MRI, and more particularly T 1 mapping, has become a most important modality to characterize myocardial tissue. In this work, the value of a radial variant of the conventional modified Look‐Locker inversion recovery sequence (raMOLLI) is demonstrated. Methods The raMOLLI acquisition scheme consisted of five radial echo trains of 80 spokes acquired using either a fast low‐angle shot (FLASH) or a true fast imaging with steady‐state‐precession (TrueFISP) readout at different time points after a single magnetization inversion. View sharing combined with a compressed sensing algorithm allowed the reconstruction of 50 images along the T 1 relaxation recovery curve, to which a dictionary‐fitting approach was applied to estimate T 1 . The sequence was validated on a nine‐vial phantom, on 19 healthy subjects, and one patient suffering from dilated cardiomyopathy. Results The raMOLLI sequence allowed a significant decrease of myocardial T 1 map acquisition time down to five heartbeats, while exhibiting a higher degree of accuracy and a comparable precision on T 1 value estimation than the conventional modified Look‐Locker inversion recovery sequence. The FLASH readout demonstrated a better robustness to B 0 inhomogeneities than TrueFISP, and was therefore preferred for in vivo acquisitions. Conclusions This sequence represents a good candidate for ultrafast acquisition of myocardial T 1 maps. Magn Reson Med 79:1387–1398, 2018.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marty et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: