Key result
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking strain assessment showed no significant difference in strain parameters, volumes, and ejection fraction between 1.5 and 3 Tesla (p>0.05).
Why the study?
Does magnetic field strength (1.5 vs 3 Tesla) affect the intra-observer reproducibility of CMR-FT strain analysis in healthy subjects?
Population
20 healthy subjects divided into 2 groups of 10
Comparison
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial… vs Cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial…
Design
Cross-sectional
Follow-up
4 weeks
Authors
Loading...
Reproducibility of CMR-FT strain appears independent of field strength in healthy subjects; extends applicability but leaves patient validation and segmental analysis open.
Observational (n=20)
Does magnetic field strength (1.5 vs 3 Tesla) affect the intra-observer reproducibility of CMR-FT strain analysis in healthy subjects?
p-value: p=>0.05
CMR-FT strain assessment shows reasonable intra-observer reproducibility that is independent of magnetic field strength (1.5 vs 3 Tesla), though segmental variability remains high.
Schuster et al. (2013) conducted an observational in Healthy (n=20). 3 Tesla cardiovascular magnetic resonance vs. 1.5 Tesla cardiovascular magnetic resonance was evaluated on Difference in strain parameters, volumes and ejection fraction between field strengths (p=>0.05). Cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking strain assessment showed no significant difference in strain parameters, volumes, and ejection fraction between 1.5 and 3 Tesla (p>0.05).