Measurement of myocardium at risk with cardiovascular MR: comparison of techniques for edema imaging.
prospective_cohort · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 25333474.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1148/radiol.14131980.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To determine variability and agreement for detecting myocardial edema with T2-weighted short-tau inversion recovery (STIR), acquisition for cardiac unified T2 edema (ACUT2E), T2 mapping, and early gadolinium enhancement (EGE) after successfully reperfused ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and diagnostic accuracy of each sequence to predict infarct-related artery (IRA). Local ethics committee approved the study, with patient informed written consent. On day 2 after successful primary angioplasty for STEMI, 53 patients were prospectively enrolled; 40 patients (mean age, 60 years) completed study. Two sets of cardiac magnetic resonance (MR) images were obtained on same day 6 hours apart. Basal, midcavity, and apical sections were obtained with each sequence. Interobserver, intraobserver, and interimage variability (1 minus intraclass correlation coefficient) and agreement (Bland-Altman method) were assessed. Size of myocardial edema significantly differed. Mean size of myocardium at risk was similar between T2-weighted STIR (18.2 g) and T2 mapping (17.3 g) (P = .54). Mean size differed between T2-weighted STIR (18.2 g) and ACUT2E (14.0 g) (P = .01) and between T2-weighted STIR (18.2 g) and EGE (14.2 g) (P = .003). T2 mapping and EGE had best agreement (interobserver bias: T2-weighted STIR, -0.9 [mean difference] ± 9.6 [standard deviation]; ACUT2E, -2.5 ± 6.9; T2 mapping, -3.8 ± 4.7; EGE, -5.3 ± 5.9; interimage bias: T2-weighted STIR, 1.5 ± 5.8; ACUT2E, -0.8 ± 4.9; T2 mapping, 3.1 ± 4.0; EGE, 1.1 ± 4.9; intraobserver bias: T2-weighted STIR, 1.4 ± 5.8; ACUT2E, 0.6 ± 4.7; T2 mapping, 2.2 ± 3.1; EGE, 1.7 ± 2.9). Variability was lowest for T2 mapping (intraobserver, 0.05; interobserver, 0.09; interimage, 0.1) followed by EGE (intraobserver, 0.03; interobserver, 0.14; interimage, 0.14), with improved detection of territory of IRA versus ACUT2E (intraobserver, 0.11; interobserver, 0.22; interimage, 0.12) and T2-weighted STIR (intraobserver, 0.1; interobserver, 0.32; interimage, 0.1). Cardiac MR methods to detect and quantify infarct myocardial edema are not interchangeable; T2 mapping is the most reproducible method, followed by EGE, ACUT2E, and T2-weighted STIR. Clinical trial registration no. NCT01468662
Medical subject headings
- Edema, Cardiac
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cine