Premium
Doppler ultrasound compared with electrocardiogram and pulse oximetry cardiac triggering: A pilot study
Author(s) -
Kording Fabian,
Schoennagel Bjoern,
Lund Gunnar,
Ueberle Friedrich,
Jung Caroline,
Adam Gerhard,
Yamamura Jin
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
magnetic resonance in medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.696
H-Index - 225
eISSN - 1522-2594
pISSN - 0740-3194
DOI - 10.1002/mrm.25502
Subject(s) - medicine , steady state free precession imaging , ultrasound , magnetic resonance imaging , nuclear medicine , cardiac magnetic resonance imaging , stroke volume , cardiac imaging , doppler ultrasound , radiology , cardiology , heart rate , blood pressure
Purpose Accurate triggering of the cardiac cycle is mandatory for optimal image acquisition and thus diagnostic quality in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. The purpose of this work was to evaluate Doppler ultrasound as an alternative trigger method in cardiac MRI. Methods Steady‐state free precession (SSFP) 2D cine CMR was performed in 11 healthy subjects at 1.5T. Doppler ultrasound (DUS), electrocardiogram (ECG) and pulse oximetry (POX) were used for cardiac triggering. DUS peak detection was verified in comparison to ECG. Quantitative analysis of image quality of each gating method was determined by calculating endocardial border sharpness (EBS) and left ventricular (LV) function parameters and compared with ECG. Results Mean difference between DUS and ECG in detected RR intervals was 0.04 ± 63 ms (r = 0.96). Trigger jitter was not different between ECG and DUS ( P = 0.15) but significant different between ECG and POX ( P = 0.01). EBS was similar between each method (3.1 ± 0.2 / 2.6 ± 0.2 / 2.9 ± 0.2 pixel). Mean differences in stroke volume were not significantly different with −1 ± 7 mL (ECG/DUS, P = 0.9) and 2 ± 10 mL (ECG/POX, P = 0.8). Conclusion Cine cardiac MRI using DUS was successfully demonstrated. DUS triggering is an alternative method for cardiac MRI and may be applied in a clinical setting. Magn Reson Med 74:1257–1265, 2015. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.