Key result
SS_SSFP MRI displayed significantly better image quality than IR_FGRE across all categories (P≤0.037) and yielded larger myocardial volumes (170.7 vs 159.2 ml, P<0.001) with equal infarct size.
Why the study?
Does SS_SSFP improve image quality and accurately determine infarct size compared to IR_FGRE in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and chronic myocardial infarction?
Cross-Sectional (n=20)
Does SS_SSFP improve image quality and accurately determine infarct size compared to IR_FGRE in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and chronic myocardial infarction?
p-value: p=0.037, 0.014, 0.021, 0.03 for image quality
SS_SSFP provides superior image quality and comparable infarct size determination to standard IR_FGRE in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation, while requiring less examination time.
Should not yet change AF imaging practice; leaves open need for outcome validation of volume differences.
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the heart generally requires breath holding and a regular rhythm. Single shot 2D steady-state free precession (SS_SSFP) is a fast sequence insensitive to arrhythmia as well as breath holding. Our purpose was to determine image quality, signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratios and infarct size with a fast single shot and a standard segmented MRI sequence in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and chronic myocardial infarction. METHODS: Twenty patients with chronic myocardial infarction and ongoing atrial fibrillation were examined with inversion recovery SS_SSFP and segmented inversion recovery 2D fast gradient echo (IR_FGRE). Image quality was assessed in four categories: delineation of infarcted and non-infarcted myocardium, occurrence of artefacts and overall image quality. SNR and CNR were calculated. Myocardial volume (ml) and infarct size, expressed as volume (ml) and extent (%), were calculated, and the methodological error was assessed. RESULTS: SS_SSFP had significantly better quality scores in all categories (P = 0.037, P = 0.014, P = 0.021, P = 0.03). SNR(infarct) and SNR(blood) were significantly better for IR_FGRE than for SS_SSFP (P = 0.048, P = 0.018). No significant difference was found in SNR(myocardium) and CNR. The myocardial volume was significantly larger with SS_SSFP (170.7 versus 159.2 ml, P<0.001), but no significant difference was found in infarct volume and infarct extent. CONCLUSION: SS_SSFP displayed significantly better image quality than IR_FGRE. The infarct size and the error in its determination were equal for both sequences, and the examination time was shorter with SS_SSFP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rosendahl et al. (2009) conducted a cross-sectional in Permanent atrial fibrillation and chronic myocardial infarction (n=20). Single shot 2D steady-state free precession (SS_SSFP) MRI vs. Segmented inversion recovery 2D fast gradient echo (IR_FGRE) MRI was evaluated on Image quality, signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratios, and infarct size (p=0.037, 0.014, 0.021, 0.03 for image quality). SS_SSFP MRI displayed significantly better image quality than IR_FGRE across all categories (P≤0.037) and yielded larger myocardial volumes (170.7 vs 159.2 ml, P<0.001) with equal infarct size.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: