Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports

, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 77–82

Usefulness of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in Early Assessment of Cardiomyopathies: Myocardial Fibrosis Is a Common Denominator

  • Ana Pastor
  • Tobias Voigt
  • Tobias Schaeffter
  • Eike Nagel
  • Valentina O. Puntmann
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (E Nagel, Section Editor)


Myocardial fibrosis is a common denominator in a wide spectrum of cardiomyopathies; it plays a major role in the pathophysiology of structural remodelling and as a predictor of adverse outcome. Quantification of myocardial fibrosis by invasive biopsy is limited in clinical practice due to the commonly scattered tissue distribution and procedural risks. Late gadolinium enhancement by cardiac magnetic resonance has revolutionized the assessment of ischemic cardiomyopathy by visualization of regional scarring after myocardial infarction. The binary (white-black) principle of contrast development and a requirement for well separated layers of healthy and diseased myocardium is straightforward for clinical decision making in ischemic heart disease, but renders this technique less powerful in conditions where the myocardium is affected diffusely. Recently emerged T1 mapping techniques allow for an individualized quantification of global and regional myocardial signal and are promising tools to separate between healthy and diseased. In this article we review the emerging evidence for T1 mapping techniques and outline the necessary future directions for a successful translational pathway.


Cardiac magnetic resonance Tissue characterization Late gadolinium enhancement T1 mapping Diffuse fibrosis 


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. 1.
    van den Borne SW, Diez J, Blankesteijn WM, et al. Myocardial remodeling after infarction: the role of myofibroblasts. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2010;7(1):30–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barallobre-Barreiro J, Didangelos A, Schoendube FA, et al. Proteomics analysis of cardiac extracellular matrix remodelling in a porcine model of ischaemia-reperfusion injury. Circulation. 2012.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ho CY, Lopez B, Coelho-Filho OR, et al. Myocardial fibrosis as an early manifestation of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:552–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruder O, Wagner A, Jensen CJ, et al. Myocardial scar visualized by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging predicts major adverse events in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(11):875–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    • Bruder O, Schneider S, Nothnagel D, et al. EuroCMR (European Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance) registry: results of the German pilot phase. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(15):1457–66. The EuroCMR database provides an invaluable means of evidence to show that CMR is increasingly applied as the first-line investigation into the cause and follow-up of cardiomyopathies in clinical routine. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim RJ, Wu E, Rafael A, et al. The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1445–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Judd RM, Lugo-Olivieri CH, Arai M, et al. Physiological basis of myocardial contrast enhancement in fast magnetic resonance images of 2-day-old reperfused canine infarcts. Circulation. 1995;92:1902–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rehwald WG, Fieno DS, Chen EL, et al. Myocardial magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent concentrations after reversible and irreversible ischemic injury. Circulation. 2002;105(2):224–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grebe O, Paetsch I, Kestler HA, et al. Optimal acquisition parameters for contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging after chronic myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2003;5(4):575–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Knowles BR, Batchelor PG, Parish V, et al. Pharmacokinetic modeling of delayed gadolinium enhancement in the myocardium. Magn Reson Med. 2008;60(6):1524–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaldoudi E, Williams CR. Relaxation time measurements in NMR imaging. I. Longitudinal relaxation time. Concepts Magn Reson. 1993;5:217–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Flacke SJ, Fischer SE, Lorenz CH. Measurement of the gadopentetate dimeglumine partition coefficient in human myocardium in vivo: normal distribution and elevation in acute and chronic infarction. Radiology. 2001;218:703–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wacker CM, Bock M, Hartlep AW, et al. Changes in myocardial oxygenation and perfusion under pharmacological stress with dipyridamole: assessment using T2* and T1 measurements. Magn Reson Med. 1999;41:686–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Iles L, Pfluger H, Phrommintikul A, et al. Evaluation of diffuse myocardial fibrosis in heart failure with cardiac magnetic resonance contrast-enhanced T1 mapping. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(19):1574–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Messroghli DR, Radjenovic A, Kozerke S, et al. Modified Look-Locker inversion recovery (MOLLI) for high-resolution T1 mapping of the heart. Magn Reson Med. 2004;52(1):141–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    • Blume U, Lockie T, Stehning C, et al. Interleaved T(1) and T(2) relaxation time mapping for cardiac applications. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;29(2):480–7. This work provides a means of combined tissue characterization of edema and necrosis by T1 and T2. In addition it re-emphasizes the rationale for the use of R1 values, as these are in linear relationship with concentration of contrast agent in the tissue. R1 map provides an estimation of concentration map of Gd-DTPA. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    • Piechnik SK, Ferreira VM, Dall'Armellina E, et al. Shortened Modified Look-Locker Inversion recovery (ShMOLLI) for clinical myocardial T1-mapping at 1.5 and 3 T within a 9 heartbeat breathhold. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010;12:69. This work provides a systematic head-to-head comparison of MOLLI and shMOLLI in 1.5 and 3 Tesla strength fields in normal volunteers and patients with myocardial infarctions. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Song T, Stainsby JA, Ho V, et al. Flexible cardiac T1 mapping using a modified look–locker acquisition with saturation recovery. Magn Reson Med. 2011;in press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Buerger C, Schaeffter T, King AP. Hierarchical adaptive local affine registration for fast and robust respiratory estimation. Med Imag Anal. 2011;15:551–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Xue H, Shah S, Greiser A, et al. Motion correction for myocardial T1 mapping using image registration with synthetic image estimation. Magn Reson Medi. 2011;in pressGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Messroghli DR, Walters K, Plein S, et al. Myocardial T1 mapping: application to patients with acute and chronic myocardial infarction. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;26(4):1081–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jellis C, Wright J, Kennedy D, et al. Association of imaging markers of myocardial fibrosis with metabolic and functional disturbances in early diabetic cardiomyopathy. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:693–702.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ng AC, Auger D, Delgado V, et al. Association between diffuse myocardial fibrosis by cardiac magnetic resonance contrast-enhanced T1 mapping and subclinical myocardial dysfunction in diabetic patients: a pilot study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sparrow P, Messroghli DR, Reid S, et al. Myocardial T1 mapping for detection of left ventricular myocardial fibrosis in chronic aortic regurgitation: pilot study. Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187:W630–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Borer JS, Truter S, Herrold EM, et al. Myocardial fibrosis in chronic aortic regurgitation: molecular and cellular responses to volume overload. Circulation. 2002;105(15):1837–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Maceira AM, Joshi J, Prasad SK, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis. Circulation. 2005;111(2):186–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sharma P, Socolow J, Patel S, et al. Effect of Gd-DTPA-BMA on blood and myocardial T1 at 1.5T and 3T in humans. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;23:323–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Flett AS, Hayward MP, Ashworth MT, et al. Equilibrium contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance for the measurement of diffuse myocardial fibrosis: preliminary validation in humans. Circulation. 2010;122:138–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schelbert EB, Testa SM, Meier CG, et al. Myocardial extravascular extracellular volume fraction measurement by gadolinium cardiovascular magnetic resonance in humans: slow infusion versus bolus. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2011;13:16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ana Pastor
    • 1
  • Tobias Voigt
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tobias Schaeffter
    • 1
  • Eike Nagel
    • 1
  • Valentina O. Puntmann
    • 1
  1. 1.King’s College London, Department of Cardiovascular Imaging, Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical EngineeringThe Rayne InstituteLondonUK
  2. 2.Philips Research, Clinical Research EuropeLondonUK

Personalised recommendations