ArticleMagnetic resonance imaging2018
Typical readout durations in spiral cine DENSE yield blurred images and underestimate cardiac strains at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T.
Article in Magnetic resonance imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Myofiber strain in healthy humans using DENSE and cDTI.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDisplacement encoding with stimulated echoes (DENSE) is a phase contrast technique that encodes tissue displacement into phase images, which are typically processed into measures of cardiac function such as strains. For improved signal to noise ratio and spatiotemporal resolution, DENSE is often acquired with a spiral readout using an 11.1 ms readout duration. However, long spiral readout durations are prone to blurring due to common phenomena such as off-resonance and T2* decay, which may alter the resulting quantifications of strain. We hypothesized that longer readout durations would reduce image quality and underestimate cardiac strains at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T and that using short readout durations could overcome these limitations. MATERIAL AND
methodsComputational simulations were performed to investigate the relationship between off-resonance and T2* decay, the spiral cine DENSE readout duration, and measured radial and circumferential strain. Five healthy participants subsequently underwent 2D spiral cine DENSE at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T with several different readout durations 11.1 ms and shorter. Pearson correlations were used to assess the relationship between cardiac strains and the spiral readout duration.
resultsSimulations demonstrated that long readout durations combined with off-resonance and T2* decay yield blurred images and underestimate strains. With the typical 11.1 ms DENSE readout, blurring was present in the anterior and lateral left ventricular segments of participants and was markedly improved with shorter readout durations. Radial and circumferential strains from those segments were significantly correlated with the readout duration. Compared to the 1.9 ms readout, the 11.1 ms readout underestimated radial and circumferential strains in those segments at both field strengths by up to 19.6% and 1.5% (absolute), or 42% and 7% (relative), respectively.
conclusionsBlurring is present in spiral cine DENSE images acquired at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T using the typical 11.1 ms readout duration, which yielded substantially reduced radial strains and mildly reduced circumferential strains. Clinical studies using spiral cine DENSE should consider these limitations, while future technical advances may need to leverage accelerated techniques to improve the robustness and accuracy of the DENSE acquisition rather than focusing solely on reduced acquisition time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.