Limits...
Impact of motion correction on reproducibility and spatial variability of quantitative myocardial T2 mapping.

Roujol S, Basha TA, Weingärtner S, Akçakaya M, Berg S, Manning WJ, Nezafat R - J Cardiovasc Magn Reson (2015)

Bottom Line: In-plane myocardial motion was corrected using an adaptive registration of varying contrast-weighted images for improved tissue characterization (ARCTIC).ARCTIC led to increased DSC in BH data (0.85 ± 0.08 vs. 0.90 ± 0.02, p = 0.007), FB data (0.78 ± 0.13 vs. 0.90 ± 0.21, p < 0.001), and FB + NAV data (0.86 ± 0.05 vs. 0.90 ± 0.02, p = 0.002), and reduced MBE in BH data (0.90 ± 0.40 vs. 0.64 ± 0.19 mm, p = 0.005), FB data (1.21 ± 0.65 vs. 0.63 ± 0.10 mm, p < 0.001), and FB + NAV data (0.81 ± 0.21 vs. 0.63 ± 0.08 mm, p < 0.001).The ARCTIC technique substantially reduces spatial mis-alignment among T2-weighted images and improves the reproducibility and spatial variability of in-vivo T2 mapping.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Medicine (Cardiovascular Division), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. sroujol@bidmc.harvard.edu.

ABSTRACT

Background: To evaluate and quantify the impact of a novel image-based motion correction technique in myocardial T2 mapping in terms of measurement reproducibility and spatial variability.

Methods: Twelve healthy adult subjects were imaged using breath-hold (BH), free breathing (FB), and free breathing with respiratory navigator gating (FB + NAV) myocardial T2 mapping sequences. Fifty patients referred for clinical CMR were imaged using the FB + NAV sequence. All sequences used a T2 prepared (T2prep) steady-state free precession acquisition. In-plane myocardial motion was corrected using an adaptive registration of varying contrast-weighted images for improved tissue characterization (ARCTIC). DICE similarity coefficient (DSC) and myocardial boundary errors (MBE) were measured to quantify the motion estimation accuracy in healthy subjects. T2 mapping reproducibility and spatial variability were evaluated in healthy subjects using 5 repetitions of the FB + NAV sequence with either 4 or 20 T2prep echo times (TE). Subjective T2 map quality was assessed in patients by an experienced reader using a 4-point scale (1-non diagnostic, 4-excellent).

Results: ARCTIC led to increased DSC in BH data (0.85 ± 0.08 vs. 0.90 ± 0.02, p = 0.007), FB data (0.78 ± 0.13 vs. 0.90 ± 0.21, p < 0.001), and FB + NAV data (0.86 ± 0.05 vs. 0.90 ± 0.02, p = 0.002), and reduced MBE in BH data (0.90 ± 0.40 vs. 0.64 ± 0.19 mm, p = 0.005), FB data (1.21 ± 0.65 vs. 0.63 ± 0.10 mm, p < 0.001), and FB + NAV data (0.81 ± 0.21 vs. 0.63 ± 0.08 mm, p < 0.001). Improved reproducibility (4TE: 5.3 ± 2.5 ms vs. 4.0 ± 1.5 ms, p = 0.016; 20TE: 3.9 ± 2.3 ms vs. 2.2 ± 0.5 ms, p = 0.002), reduced spatial variability (4TE: 12.8 ± 3.5 ms vs. 10.3 ± 2.5 ms, p < 0.001; 20TE: 9.7 ± 3.5 ms vs. 7.5 ± 1.4 ms) and improved subjective score of T2 map quality (3.43 ± 0.79 vs. 3.69 ± 0.55, p < 0.001) were obtained using ARCTIC.

Conclusions: The ARCTIC technique substantially reduces spatial mis-alignment among T2-weighted images and improves the reproducibility and spatial variability of in-vivo T2 mapping.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Subjective assessment of T2 map quality in patients. In-plane motion correction using ARCTIC increased T2 map quality scores (3.69 ± 0.55 vs. 3.43 ± 0.79, p < 0.001)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4465156&req=5

Fig7: Subjective assessment of T2 map quality in patients. In-plane motion correction using ARCTIC increased T2 map quality scores (3.69 ± 0.55 vs. 3.43 ± 0.79, p < 0.001)

Mentions: Figure 7 shows the subjective assessment of T2 map quality obtained in 50 patients. Overall (N = 150 T2 maps), ARCTIC motion corrected T2 maps had higher quality score than uncorrected T2 maps (3.69 ± 0.55 vs. 3.43 ± 0.79, p < 0.001). In the relative comparison of T2 map quality, uncorrected T2 maps has superior, similar, and inferior quality than ARCTIC motion corrected T2 maps in 4 maps (3 %), 99 maps (66 %), and 47 maps (31 %), respectively. Furthermore, the motion level was assessed as “no motion” in 35 slices (23%), “small motion” in 69 slices (46%), and “large motion” in 46 slices (30%). In “no motion” data, all ARCTIC motion corrected and uncorrected T2 maps received a subjective quality score of 4.0 and 97 % of them had similar relative quality. In “small motion” data, ARCTIC motion corrected T2 maps had higher subjective quality score (3.71 ± 0.49 vs. 3.61 ± 0.60, p = 0.015) and superior (23%), similar (75%) and inferior (1%) relative quality than uncorrected T2 maps. In “large motion” data, ARCTIC motion corrected T2 maps had higher subjective quality score (3.41 ± 0.69 vs. 2.72 ± 0.83, p < 0.001) and superior (65%), similar (28%) and inferior (6%) relative quality than uncorrected T2 maps.Fig. 7


Impact of motion correction on reproducibility and spatial variability of quantitative myocardial T2 mapping.

Roujol S, Basha TA, Weingärtner S, Akçakaya M, Berg S, Manning WJ, Nezafat R - J Cardiovasc Magn Reson (2015)

Subjective assessment of T2 map quality in patients. In-plane motion correction using ARCTIC increased T2 map quality scores (3.69 ± 0.55 vs. 3.43 ± 0.79, p < 0.001)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4465156&req=5

Fig7: Subjective assessment of T2 map quality in patients. In-plane motion correction using ARCTIC increased T2 map quality scores (3.69 ± 0.55 vs. 3.43 ± 0.79, p < 0.001)
Mentions: Figure 7 shows the subjective assessment of T2 map quality obtained in 50 patients. Overall (N = 150 T2 maps), ARCTIC motion corrected T2 maps had higher quality score than uncorrected T2 maps (3.69 ± 0.55 vs. 3.43 ± 0.79, p < 0.001). In the relative comparison of T2 map quality, uncorrected T2 maps has superior, similar, and inferior quality than ARCTIC motion corrected T2 maps in 4 maps (3 %), 99 maps (66 %), and 47 maps (31 %), respectively. Furthermore, the motion level was assessed as “no motion” in 35 slices (23%), “small motion” in 69 slices (46%), and “large motion” in 46 slices (30%). In “no motion” data, all ARCTIC motion corrected and uncorrected T2 maps received a subjective quality score of 4.0 and 97 % of them had similar relative quality. In “small motion” data, ARCTIC motion corrected T2 maps had higher subjective quality score (3.71 ± 0.49 vs. 3.61 ± 0.60, p = 0.015) and superior (23%), similar (75%) and inferior (1%) relative quality than uncorrected T2 maps. In “large motion” data, ARCTIC motion corrected T2 maps had higher subjective quality score (3.41 ± 0.69 vs. 2.72 ± 0.83, p < 0.001) and superior (65%), similar (28%) and inferior (6%) relative quality than uncorrected T2 maps.Fig. 7

Bottom Line: In-plane myocardial motion was corrected using an adaptive registration of varying contrast-weighted images for improved tissue characterization (ARCTIC).ARCTIC led to increased DSC in BH data (0.85 ± 0.08 vs. 0.90 ± 0.02, p = 0.007), FB data (0.78 ± 0.13 vs. 0.90 ± 0.21, p < 0.001), and FB + NAV data (0.86 ± 0.05 vs. 0.90 ± 0.02, p = 0.002), and reduced MBE in BH data (0.90 ± 0.40 vs. 0.64 ± 0.19 mm, p = 0.005), FB data (1.21 ± 0.65 vs. 0.63 ± 0.10 mm, p < 0.001), and FB + NAV data (0.81 ± 0.21 vs. 0.63 ± 0.08 mm, p < 0.001).The ARCTIC technique substantially reduces spatial mis-alignment among T2-weighted images and improves the reproducibility and spatial variability of in-vivo T2 mapping.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Medicine (Cardiovascular Division), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. sroujol@bidmc.harvard.edu.

ABSTRACT

Background: To evaluate and quantify the impact of a novel image-based motion correction technique in myocardial T2 mapping in terms of measurement reproducibility and spatial variability.

Methods: Twelve healthy adult subjects were imaged using breath-hold (BH), free breathing (FB), and free breathing with respiratory navigator gating (FB + NAV) myocardial T2 mapping sequences. Fifty patients referred for clinical CMR were imaged using the FB + NAV sequence. All sequences used a T2 prepared (T2prep) steady-state free precession acquisition. In-plane myocardial motion was corrected using an adaptive registration of varying contrast-weighted images for improved tissue characterization (ARCTIC). DICE similarity coefficient (DSC) and myocardial boundary errors (MBE) were measured to quantify the motion estimation accuracy in healthy subjects. T2 mapping reproducibility and spatial variability were evaluated in healthy subjects using 5 repetitions of the FB + NAV sequence with either 4 or 20 T2prep echo times (TE). Subjective T2 map quality was assessed in patients by an experienced reader using a 4-point scale (1-non diagnostic, 4-excellent).

Results: ARCTIC led to increased DSC in BH data (0.85 ± 0.08 vs. 0.90 ± 0.02, p = 0.007), FB data (0.78 ± 0.13 vs. 0.90 ± 0.21, p < 0.001), and FB + NAV data (0.86 ± 0.05 vs. 0.90 ± 0.02, p = 0.002), and reduced MBE in BH data (0.90 ± 0.40 vs. 0.64 ± 0.19 mm, p = 0.005), FB data (1.21 ± 0.65 vs. 0.63 ± 0.10 mm, p < 0.001), and FB + NAV data (0.81 ± 0.21 vs. 0.63 ± 0.08 mm, p < 0.001). Improved reproducibility (4TE: 5.3 ± 2.5 ms vs. 4.0 ± 1.5 ms, p = 0.016; 20TE: 3.9 ± 2.3 ms vs. 2.2 ± 0.5 ms, p = 0.002), reduced spatial variability (4TE: 12.8 ± 3.5 ms vs. 10.3 ± 2.5 ms, p < 0.001; 20TE: 9.7 ± 3.5 ms vs. 7.5 ± 1.4 ms) and improved subjective score of T2 map quality (3.43 ± 0.79 vs. 3.69 ± 0.55, p < 0.001) were obtained using ARCTIC.

Conclusions: The ARCTIC technique substantially reduces spatial mis-alignment among T2-weighted images and improves the reproducibility and spatial variability of in-vivo T2 mapping.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus