Premium
Percent infarct mapping for delayed contrast enhancement magnetic resonance imaging to quantify myocardial viability by Gd(DTPA)
Author(s) -
Simor Tamás,
Surányi Pál,
Ruzsics Balázs,
Tóth Attila,
Tóth Levente,
Kiss Pál,
Brott Brigitta C.,
VargaSzemes Ákos,
Elgavish Ada,
Elgavish Gabriel A.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.22296
Subject(s) - full width at half maximum , nuclear medicine , myocardial infarction , magnetic resonance imaging , voxel , medicine , chemistry , nuclear magnetic resonance , physics , radiology , optics
Purpose To demonstrate the advantages of signal intensity percent‐infarct‐mapping (SI‐PIM) using the standard delayed enhancement (DE) acquisition in assessing viability following myocardial infarction (MI). SI‐PIM quantifies MI density with a voxel‐by‐voxel resolution in clinically used DE images. Materials and Methods In canines ( n = 6), 96 hours after reperfused MI and administration of 0.2 mmol/kg Gd(DTPA), ex vivo DE images were acquired and SI‐PIMs calculated. SI‐PIM data were compared with data from DE images analyzed with several thresholding levels using SI remote+2SD , SI remote+6SD , SI full width half maximum (SI FWHM ), and with triphenyl‐tetrazolium‐chloride (TTC) staining. SI‐PIM was also compared to R1 percent infarct mapping (R1‐PIM). Results Left ventricular infarct volumes (IV) in DE images, IV SIremote+2SD and IV SIremote+6SD , overestimated (P < 0.05) TTC by medians of 13.21 mL [10.2; 15.2] and 6.2 mL [3.79; 8.23], respectively. SI FWHM , SI‐PIM, and R1‐PIM, however, only nonsignificantly underestimated TTC, by medians of −0.10 mL [−0.12, −0.06], −0.86 mL [−1.04; 1.54], and −1.30 mL [−4.99; −0.29], respectively. The infarct‐involved voxel volume (IIVV) of SI‐PIM, 32.4 mL [21.2, 46.3] is higher (P < 0.01) than IIVVs of SI FWHM 8.3 mL [3.79, 19.0]. SI‐PIM FWHM , however, underestimates TTC (−5.74 mL [−11.89; −2.52] (P < 0.01)). Thus, SI‐PIM outperforms SI FWHM because larger IIVVs are obtained, and thus PIs both in the rim and the core of the infarcted tissue are characterized, in contradistinction from DE‐SI FWHM , which shows mainly the infarct core. Conclusion We have shown here, ex vivo, that SI‐PIM has the same advantages as R1‐PIM, but it is based on the scanning sequences of DE imaging, and thus it is obtainable within the same short scanning time as DE. This makes it a practical method for clinical studies. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2010;32:859–868. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.