Medizinische Universität Graz Austria/Österreich - Forschungsportal - Medical University of Graz

Logo MUG-Forschungsportal

Gewählte Publikation:

SHR Neuro Krebs Kardio Lipid Stoffw Microb

Kräuter, C; Reiter, U; Reiter, C; Nizhnikava, V; Schmidt, A; Stollberger, R; Fuchsjäger, M; Reiter, G.
Impact of the Choice of Native T1 in Pixelwise Myocardial Blood Flow Quantification.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2021; 53(3):755-765 Doi: 10.1002/jmri.27375 [OPEN ACCESS]
Web of Science PubMed PUBMED Central FullText FullText_MUG


Führende Autor*innen der Med Uni Graz
Kräuter Corina
Reiter Ursula
Co-Autor*innen der Med Uni Graz
Fuchsjäger Michael
Reiter Clemens
Reiter Gert
Schmidt Albrecht
Stollberger Rudolf

Dimensions Citations:

Plum Analytics:

Scite (citation analytics):

BACKGROUND: Quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) from dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI can be performed using a signal intensity model that incorporates T1 values of blood and myocardium. PURPOSE: To assess the impact of T1 values on pixelwise MBF quantification, specifically to evaluate the influence of 1) study population-averaged vs. subject-specific, 2) diastolic vs. systolic, and 3) regional vs. global myocardial T1 values. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. SUBJECTS: Fifteen patients with chronic coronary heart disease. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3T; modified Look-Locker inversion recovery for T1 mapping and saturation recovery gradient echo for DCE imaging, both acquired in a mid-ventricular short-axis slice in systole and diastole. ASSESSMENT: MBF was estimated using Fermi modeling and signal intensity nonlinearity correction with different T1 values: study population-averaged blood and myocardial, subject-specific systolic and diastolic, and segmental T1 values. Myocardial segments with perfusion deficits were identified visually from DCE series. STATISTICAL TESTS: The relationships between MBF parameters derived by different methods were analyzed by Bland-Altman analysis; corresponding mean values were compared by t-test. RESULTS: Using subject-specific diastolic T1 values, global diastolic MBF was 0.61 ± 0.13 mL/(min·g). It did not differ from global MBF derived from the study population-averaged T1 (P = 0.88), but the standard deviation of differences was large (0.07 mL/(min·g), 11% of mean MBF). Global diastolic and systolic MBF did not differ (P = 0.12), whereas global diastolic MBF using systolic (0.62 ± 0.13 mL/(min·g)) and diastolic T1 values differed (P < 0.05). If regional instead of global T1 values were used, segmental MBF was lower in segments with perfusion deficits (bias = -0.03 mL/(min·g), -7% of mean MBF, P < 0.05) but higher in segments without perfusion deficits (bias = 0.01 mL/(min·g), 1% of mean MBF, P < 0.05). DATA CONCLUSION: Whereas cardiac phase-specific T1 values have a minor impact on MBF estimates, subject-specific and myocardial segment-specific T1 values substantially affect MBF quantification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 3.
Find related publications in this database (using NLM MeSH Indexing)
Coronary Circulation - administration & dosage
Diastole - administration & dosage
Humans - administration & dosage
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - administration & dosage
Myocardial Perfusion Imaging - administration & dosage
Prospective Studies - administration & dosage
Systole - administration & dosage

Find related publications in this database (Keywords)
myocardial blood flow
cardiovascular magnetic resonance
nonlinearity correction
dynamic contrast enhancement
© Med Uni Graz Impressum