Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 14, Issue 8, pp 1348–1352 | Cite as

Comparison between tagged MRI and standard cine MRI for evaluation of left ventricular ejection fraction

  • Christophe Dornier
  • G. Aernout Somsen
  • Marko K. Ivancevic
  • Nael F. Osman
  • Dominique Didier
  • Alberto Righetti
  • Jean-Paul Vallée
Cardiac

Abstract

Global left ventricular function is a prognostic indicator and is used to evaluate therapeutical interventions in patients with heart failure. Regional left ventricular function can be determined with tagged MRI. Assessment of global left ventricular function using the tagging data may have additional clinical value without incurring extra scanning time, which is currently a limiting factor in cardiac imaging. Direct determination of end-diastolic volume is not possible with conventional tagged MRI. However, end-systolic volume can be directly measured because myocardium–blood contrast improves through a tagged image series. We investigated the potential of tagged MRI using frequency-domain analysis software to retrospectively track end-diastolic contour from end-systolic contour and subsequently calculate the ejection fraction. Tagged MRI was compared with the standard bright-blood cine MRI in healthy volunteers (n=20) and patients with previous myocardial infarction (n=8). Left ventricular ejection fraction derived from tagged MRI is linearly correlated to left ventricular ejection fraction obtained by standard cardiac cine MRI (y=1.0x+1.31, r>0.98, p=0.014). In addition, the inter-observer and intra-observer coefficient of variation for left ventricular ejection fraction measurements was low (CVintra=0.4%, CVinter=1.3%). With tagged MRI, only end-systolic volume needs to be manually determined, and accurate estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction is obtained because end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes are determined using identical anatomical points. Our data indicate that tagged MRI can be used to quantitatively assess both regional and global left ventricular function. Therefore, tagged MRI may be a valuable clinical tool for determining the prognosis and evaluating the effect of therapeutical intervention using a single imaging session in patients with left ventricular dysfunction.

Keywords

Cardiac imaging Tagged MRI Ejection fraction Cine MRI Left ventricle 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Rosalind Perrin for reviewing the paper and Dominique Joliat (Philips Medical Systems) for technical support. This study was partially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant SNF 31-57020.99) and the Geneva University Hospital (HUG).

References

  1. 1.
    Haider AW, Larson MG, Benjamin EJ, Levy D (1998) Increased left ventricular mass and hypertrophy are associated with increased risk for sudden death. J Am Coll Cardiol 33:1454–1459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    CIBIS-II Investigators and Committees (1999) The cardiac insufficiency bisoprolol study II (CIBIS-II): a randomized trial. Lancet 353:9–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bouton S, Yang A, McCrindle BW, Kidd L, McVeigh ER, Zerhouni EA (1991) Differentiation of tumor from viable myocardium using cardiac tagging with MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 15:676–678PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Geskin G, Kramer CM, Rogers WJ, et al. (1998) Quantitative assessment of myocardial viability after infarction by dobutamine magnetic resonance tagging. Circulation 98:217–223PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vaduganathan P, He ZX, Vick GW III, Mahmarian JJ, Verani MS (1999) Evaluation of left ventricular wall motion, volumes, and ejection fraction by gated myocardial tomography with technetium 99m-labeled tetrofosmin: a comparison with cine magnetic resonance imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 6:3–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Missouris CG, Forbat SM, Singer DRJ, Markandu ND, Underwood R, MacGregor G (1996) Echocardiography overestimates left ventricular mass: a comparative study with magnetic resonance imaging in patients with hypertension. J Hypertens 14:1005–1010PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Croisille P, Revel D (2000) MR imaging of the heart: functional imaging. Eur Radiol 10:7–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bogaert J, Maes A, Van de Werf F et al (1999) Functional recovery of subepicardial myocardial tissue in transmural myocardial infarction after successful reperfusion: an important contribution to the improvement of regional and global left ventricular function. Circulation 99:36–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zerhouni EA, Parish DM, Rogers WJ, Yang A, Shapiro EP (1988) Human heart: tagging with MR imaging. A method for noninvasive assessment of myocardial motion. Radiology 169:59–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Axel L, Dougherty L (1989) Heart wall motion: improved method of spatial modulation of magnetization for MR imaging. Radiology 172:349–350PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gyngell ML (1988) The application of steady-state free precession in rapid 2DFT NMR imaging: FAST and CE-FAST sequences. Magn Reson Imaging 6:415–419PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McVeigh ER (1996) MRI of myocardial function: motion tracking techniques. Magn Reson Imaging 14:137–150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Osman NF, Kerwin WS, McVeigh ER, Prince JL (1999) Cardiac motion tracking using CINE harmonic phase (HARP) magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 42:1048–1060CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van der Geest RJ, Jansen E, Buller VGM, Reiber JHC (1997) Automated detection of left ventricular epi- and endocardial contours in short-axis MR images. Comput Cardiol 21:33–36Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pattynama PMT, Lamb HJ, Van der Velde EA, Van der Wall EE, De Roos A (1993) Left ventricular measurements with cine and spin-echo MR imaging; a study of reproducibility with variance component analysis. Radiology 187:261–268PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–311PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christophe Dornier
    • 1
  • G. Aernout Somsen
    • 2
  • Marko K. Ivancevic
    • 1
  • Nael F. Osman
    • 3
  • Dominique Didier
    • 1
  • Alberto Righetti
    • 2
  • Jean-Paul Vallée
    • 1
  1. 1.Département de Radiologie et d’Informatique MedicaleHôpitaux Universitaires de GenèveGenevaSwitzerland
  2. 2.Div. de Cardiologie, Département de Médecine InterneHôpitaux Universitaires de GenèveGenevaSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations