English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background  Contrast-enhanced (CE) steady-state free precession (SSFP) CMR at 1.5T has been shown to be a valuable alternative to T2-based methods for the detection and quantifications of area-at-risk (AAR) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. However, CE-SSFP’s capacity for assessment of AAR at 3T has not been investigated. We examined the clinical utility of CE-SSFP and T2-STIR for the retrospective assessment of AAR at 3T with single-photon-emission-computed tomography (SPECT) validation.    Materials and methods  A total of 60 AMI patients (ST-elevation AMI, n = 44;  non-ST-elevation AMI, n = 16) were recruited into the CMR study between 3 and 7 days post revascularization. All patients underwent T2-STIR, CE-bSSFP and late-gadolinium-enhancement CMR. For validation, SPECT images were acquired in a subgroup of patients (n = 30).    Results  In 53 of 60 patients (88 %), T2-STIR was of diagnostic quality compared with 54 of 60 (90 %) with CE-SSFP. In a head-to-head per-slice comparison (n = 365), there was no difference in AAR quantified using T2-STIR and CE-SSFP (R 2  = 0.92,  p  < 0.001; bias:-0.4 ± 0.8 cm 2 ,  p  = 0.46). On a per-patient basis, there was good agreement between CE-SSFP (n = 29) and SPECT (R 2  = 0.86,  p  < 0.001; bias: − 1.3 ± 7.8 %LV,  p  = 0.39) for AAR determination. T2-STIR also showed good agreement with SPECT for AAR measurement (R 2  = 0.81,  p  < 0.001, bias: 0.5 ± 11.1 %LV,  p  = 0.81). There was also a strong agreement between CE-SSFP and T2-STIR with respect to the assessment of AAR on per-patient analysis (R 2  = 0.84,  p  < 0.001, bias: − 2.1 ± 10.1 %LV,  p  = 0.31).    Conclusions  At 3T, both CE-SSFP and T2-STIR can retrospectively quantify the at-risk myocardium with high accuracy.

journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance

Retrospective assessment of at-risk myocardium in reperfused acute myocardial infarction patients using contrast‐enhanced balanced steady‐state free‐precession cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 3T with SPECT validation