Background Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)–derived extracellular volume (ECV) requires a hematocrit (Hct) to correct contrast volume distributions in blood. However, the timely assessment of Hct can be challenging and has limited the routine clinical application of ECV. The goal of the present study was to evaluate whether ECV measurements lead to significant error if a venous Hct was unavailable on the day of CMR. Methods 109 patients with CMR T1 mapping and two venous Hcts (Hct0: a Hct from the day of CMR, and Hct1: a Hct from a different day) were retrospectively identified. A synthetic Hct (Hctsyn) derived from native blood T1 was also assessed. The study used two different ECV methods, (1) a conventional method in which ECV was estimated from native and postcontrast T1 maps using a region-based method, and (2) an inline method in which ECV was directly measured from inline ECV mapping. ECVs measured with Hct0, Hct1, and Hctsyn were compared for each method, and the reference ECV (ECV0) was defined using the Hct0. The error between synthetic (ECVsyn) and ECV0was analyzed for the two ECV methods. Results ECV measured using Hct1 and Hctsyn were significantly correlated with ECV0 for each method. No significant differences were observed between ECV0 and ECV measured with Hct1 (ECV1; 28.4 ± 6.6% vs. 28.3 ± 6.1%, p = 0.789) and between ECV0 and ECV calculated with Hctsyn (ECVsyn; 28.4 ± 6.6% vs. 28.2 ± 6.2%, p = 0.45) using the conventional method. Similarly, ECV0 was not significantly different from ECV1 (28.5 ± 6.7% vs. 28.5 ± 6.2, p = 0.801) and ECVsyn (28.5 ± 6.7% vs. 28.4 ± 6.0, p = 0.974) using inline method. ECVsyn values revealed relatively large discrepancies in patients with lower Hcts compared with those with higher Hcts. Conclusions Venous Hcts measured on a different day from that of the CMR examination can still be used to measure ECV. ECVsyn can provide an alternative method to quantify ECV without needing a blood sample, but significant ECV errors occur in patients with severe anemia.
This prospective study aimed to investigate the ability of spiral ultrashort echo time (UTE) and compressed sensing volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (CS-VIBE) sequences in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared to conventional VIBE and chest computed tomography (CT) in terms of image quality and small nodule detection. Patients with small lung nodules scheduled for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lung wedge resection were prospectively enrolled. Each patient underwent non-contrast chest CT and non-contrast MRI on the same day prior to thoracic surgery. The chest CT was performed to obtain a standard reference for nodule size, location, and morphology. The chest MRI included breath-hold conventional VIBE and CS-VIBE with scanning durations of 11 and 13 s, respectively, and free-breathing spiral UTE for 3.5–5 min. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and normal structure visualizations were measured to evaluate MRI quality. Nodule detection sensitivity was evaluated on a lobe-by-lobe basis. Inter-reader and inter-modality reliability analyses were performed using the Cohen κ statistic and the nodule size comparison was performed using Bland–Altman plots. Among 96 pulmonary nodules requiring surgery, the average nodule diameter was 7.7 ± 3.9 mm (range: 4–20 mm); of the 73 resected nodules, most were invasive cancer (74%) or pre-invasive carcinoma in situ (15%). Both spiral UTE and CS-VIBE images achieved significantly higher overall image quality scores, SNRs, and CNRs than conventional VIBE. Spiral UTE (81%) and CS-VIBE (83%) achieved a higher lung nodule detection rate than conventional VIBE (53%). Specifically, the nodule detection rate for spiral UTE and CS-VIBE reached 95% and 100% for nodules >8 and >10 mm, respectively. A 90% detection rate was achieved for nodules of all sizes with a part-solid or solid morphology. Spiral UTE and CS-VIBE under-estimated the nodule size by 0.2 ± 1.4 mm with 95% limits of agreement from −2.6 to 2.9 mm and by 0.2 ± 1.7 mm with 95% limits of agreement from −3.3 to 3.5 mm, respectively, compared to the reference CT. In conclusion, chest CT remains the gold standard for lung nodule detection due to its high image resolutions. Both spiral UTE and CS-VIBE MRI could detect small lung nodules requiring surgery and could be considered a potential alternative to chest CT; however, their clinical application requires further investigation.
An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.
This study was designed to identify whether the position and size of the region of interest (ROI) influence extracellular volume fraction (ECV) measurements. Patients with localized (n = 203) or infiltrative (n = 215) cardiomyopathies and 36 normal controls were enrolled in this study. ECV measurements at 4 different regions, including the anterior, septal, posterior and lateral wall regions, were measured, and all groups were compared. Regional ECV was correlated with the corresponding regional wall thickness. The diagnostic power to differentiate the myocardial abnormalities was evaluated for each myocardial region. ECVs measured using five different ROI sizes within each myocardial region were compared. Our results showed that ECVs varied among the myocardial regions, and this variation was significantly associated with regional wall thicknesses. For the detection of myocardial abnormalities, regional ECV revealed similar results as ECV derived from the whole region except for the anterior region. No significant difference was found in the ECVs measured using the five different ROI sizes. In conclusion, CMR-derived ECVs vary with myocardial region, and this variation is significantly associated with the regional wall thickness. In contrast, the measured size of the ROI has less of an effect on the ECV.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.