Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
PURPOSE: To assess a late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) single-breath-hold three-dimensional (3D) inversion recovery magnetic resonance (MR) imaging sequence for the quantification of myocardial scar mass and transmurality in comparison with a clinically established two-dimensional (2D) sequence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients gave written informed consent to participate in this institutional review board-approved study. Ninety patients (84 men; mean age, 54.4 years ± 10.8 standard deviation) with acute (n = 30), subacute (n = 30), or chronic (n = 30) myocardial infarction were included. Imaging was performed by using a 1.5-T clinical MR imaging system. Spatial resolution was identical for 3D and 2D images (1.5 × 1.5 mm(2); section thickness, 8 mm; no section gap). Quantitative comparisons of myocardial mass (in grams), scar mass (in grams), and scar transmurality (on a five-point scale) were performed by using the Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analysis (for myocardial and scar mass) or κ statistics (for transmurality). RESULTS: There were no significant differences between 2D and 3D data sets in terms of mean myocardial mass (2D: 148.3 g ± 35.1; 3D: 148.1 g ± 34.6; P = .76) and scar tissue mass (2D: 31.8 g ± 14.6; 3D: 31.6 g ± 15.5; P = .39), with strong and significant correlation regarding both myocardial mass (r = 0.982; P < .001) and scar tissue mass (r = 0.980; P < .001). Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of 0.21 g ± 6.64 (range, -19.64 to 18.44 g) for myocardial mass and a mean difference of 0.26 g ± 2.88 (range, -7.15 to 7.74 g) for scar mass between the 2D and 3D data sets. Agreement regarding scar transmurality was good (κ = 0.75). Acquisition time was significantly shorter for 3D data sets (26.7 seconds ± 4.4 vs 367.7 seconds ± 56.4; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Three-dimensional LGE MR imaging enables quantitative evaluation of scar tissue mass and transmurality in patients with acute, subacute, or chronic myocardial infarction at significantly reduced acquisition times compared with 2D LGE MR imaging.
Goetti et al. (Wed,) studied this question.