Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 17, Issue 9, pp 2218–2224 | Cite as

Myocardial tagging with steady state free precession techniques and semi-automatic postprocessing—impact on diagnostic value

  • Thorsten R. C. Johnson
  • Nicole Bayrhof
  • Armin Huber
  • Joost P. A. Kuijer
  • Roger Luechinger
  • Olaf Dietrich
  • Dietrich Stoevesandt
  • Dorthe Pedersen
  • Maximilian F. Reiser
  • Stefan O. Schoenberg
Cardiac

Abstract

Our aim was to determine the diagnostic value of myocardial tagging sequences with regard to the evaluable share of the cardiac cycle. Thirty-three patients were examined at 1.5 T using tagging sequences with gradient-echo (GRE) readout, 18 patients at 1.5 T with steady-state free precession (SSFP), and 11 patients at 3 T using GRE. Two observers graded image quality and determined the share of the cardiac cycle for which postprocessing could be performed (1, optimal; 2, little interaction; 3, whole cycle assessable; 4, diastole non-assessable; 5, systole incomplete; 6, non-diagnostic). With GRE at 1.5 T, median image quality was 4.0 (95% CI 4.0–5.0), while it was significantly better with 2.0 (2.0–3.0) using the SSFP technique and similar at 3 T with 2.9 (1.7–3.5). With GRE at 1.5 T, systole could be assessed in 69% of patients, and an evaluation of the whole cardiac cycle was not possible. With the SSFP sequence at 1.5 T and GRE at 3 T, an evaluation of the whole cardiac cycle was possible in 71% and 70% of the patients, respectively, and systole was assessable in all patients. Tagging sequences with SSFP readout at 1.5 T make a semi-automatic evaluation of the whole cardiac cycle feasible in a large share of patients.

Keywords

Cardiac mri Wall motion Myocardial tagging 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Significant parts of the data for this study were acquired by N. Bayrhof as parts of the research for their doctoral thesis at the Medical Faculty of the University of Munich.

References

  1. 1.
    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
  2. 2.
    Axel L, Dougherty L (1989) MR imaging of motion with spatial modulation of magnetization. Radiology 171:841–845PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fischer SE, McKinnon GC, Maier SE, Boesiger P (1993) Improved myocardial tagging contrast. Magn Reson Med 30:191–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mosher TJ, Smith MB (1990) A DANTE tagging sequence for the evaluation of translational sample motion. Magn Reson Med 15:334–339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stuber M, Fischer SE, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P (1999) Toward high-resolution myocardial tagging. Magn Reson Med 41:639–643PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peters DC, Epstein FH, McVeigh ER (2001) Myocardial wall tagging with undersampled projection reconstruction. Magn Reson Med 45:562–567PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ryf S, Kissinger KV, Spiegel MA, Bornert P, Manning WJ, Boesiger P, Stuber M (2004) Spiral MR myocardial tagging. Magn Reson Med 51:237–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herzka DA, Guttman MA, McVeigh ER (2003) Myocardial tagging with SSFP. Magn Reson Med 49:329–340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zwanenburg JJM, Kuijer JPA, Marcus JT, Heethaar RM (2003) Steady-state free precession with myocardial tagging: CSPAMM in a single breathhold. Magn Reson Med 49:722–730PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnson T, Hahn D, Sandstede J (2004) Quantitative analysis of left ventricular wall motion with MRI tagging. Radiologe 44:158–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kramer U, Deshpande V, Fenchel M, Klumpp B, Laub G, Finn JP, Claussen CD, Miller S (2006) Cardiac MR tagging: optimization of sequence parameters and comparison at 1.5 T and 3.0 T in a volunteer study. Rofo 178:515–524PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Matter C, Nagel E, Stuber M, Boesiger P, Hess OM (1996) Assessment of systolic and diastolic LV function by MR myocardial tagging. Basic Res Cardiol 91(Suppl 2):23–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stuber M, Scheidegger MB, Fischer SE, Nagel E, Steinemann F, Hess OM, Boesiger P (1999) Alterations in the local myocardial motion pattern in patients suffering from pressure overload due to aortic stenosis. Circulation 100:361–368PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sandstede JJ, Johnson T, Harre K, Beer M, Hofmann S, Pabst T, Kenn W, Voelker W, Neubauer S, Hahn D (2002) Cardiac systolic rotation and contraction before and after valve replacement for aortic stenosis: a myocardial tagging study using MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:953–958PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nagel E, Stuber M, Lakatos M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P, Hess OM (2000) Cardiac rotation and relaxation after anterolateral myocardial infarction. Coron Artery Dis 11:261–267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dornier C, Somsen GA, Ivancevic MK, Osman NF, Didier D, Righetti A, Vallee JP (2004) Comparison between tagged MRI and standard cine MRI for evaluation of left ventricular ejection fraction. Eur Radiol 14:1348–1352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kuijpers D (2005) Diagnosis of coronary artery disease with dobutamine-stress MRI. Eur Radiol 15(Suppl 2):B48–B51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Strach K, Meyer C, Schild H, Sommer T (2006) Cardiac stress MR imaging with dobutamine. Eur Radiol 16:2728–2738PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marcus JT, Gotte MJW, Van Rossum AC, Kuijer JPA, Heethaar RM, Axel L, Visser CA (1997) Myocardial function in infarcted and remote regions early after infarction in man: assessment by magnetic resonance tagging and strain analysis. Magn Reson Med 38:803–810PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kramer CM, Rogers WJ, Theobald TM, Power TP, Petruolo S, Reichek N (1996) Remote noninfarcted region dysfunction soon after first anterior myocardial infarction. A magnetic resonance tagging study. Circulation 94:660–666PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sandstede J, Machann H, Machann W, Beer M, Johnson T, Harre K, Pabst T, Kenn W, Hahn D (2002) Interindividual-variability of the analysis of regional myocardial wall function after myocardial infarction and revascularization. Rofo 174:1147–1153PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Osman NF, Kerwin WS, McVeigh ER, Prince JL (1999) Cardiac motion tracking using CINE harmonic phase (HARP) magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 42:1048–1060PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ryf S, Spiegel MA, Gerber M, Boesiger P (2002) Myocardial tagging with 3D-CSPAMM. J Magn Reson Imaging 16:320–325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gotte MJW, van Rossum AC, Twisk JWR, Kuijer JPA, Marcus JT, Visser CA (2001) Quantification of regional contractile function after infarction: strain analysis superior to wall thickening analysis in discriminating infarct from remote myocardium. J Am Coll Cardiol 37:808–817PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gutberlet M, Schwinge K, Freyhardt P, Spors B, Grothoff M, Denecke T, Ludemann L, Noeske R, Niendorf T, Felix R (2005) Influence of high magnetic field strengths and parallel acquisition strategies on image quality in cardiac 2D CINE magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of 1.5 T vs. 3.0 T. Eur Radiol 15:1586–1597PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schar M, Kozerke S, Fischer SE, Boesiger P (2004) Cardiac SSFP imaging at 3 Tesla. Magn Reson Med 51:799–806PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thorsten R. C. Johnson
    • 1
    • 6
  • Nicole Bayrhof
    • 1
  • Armin Huber
    • 1
  • Joost P. A. Kuijer
    • 2
  • Roger Luechinger
    • 3
  • Olaf Dietrich
    • 1
  • Dietrich Stoevesandt
    • 4
  • Dorthe Pedersen
    • 5
  • Maximilian F. Reiser
    • 1
  • Stefan O. Schoenberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Clinical RadiologyGrosshadern Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany
  2. 2.Department of Clinical Physics and Medical TechnologyVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Institute for Biomedical EngineeringUniversity and ETH ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  4. 4.Clinic for Diagnostic RadiologyMartin Luther University Halle-WittenbergHalleGermany
  5. 5.Danish Research Centre for Magnetic ResonanceCopenhagen University HospitalHvidovreDenmark
  6. 6.Department of Clinical RadiologyUniversity of Munich—Grosshadern CampusMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations