The British journal of radiology · 2022
Simplified image acquisition and detection of ischemic and non-ischemic myocardial fibrosis with fixed short inversion time magnetic resonance late gadolinium enhancement.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Polacin Malgorzata, Karolyi Mihaly, Blüthgen Christian, Pilz Nik, Eberhard Matthias, Alkadhi Hatem, Kozerke Sebastian, Manka Robert
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Late gadolinium enhancement with fixed short inversion time (LGEshort) provides excellent tissue contrast with dark scar and bright blood pool and does not need prior myocardial nulling. We hypothesize better visibility of ischemic scars and equal visibility of non-ischemic LGE in LGEshort compared to clinically established LGE (LGEstandard).
METHODS: LGEshort and LGEstandard were retrospectively evaluated in 179 patients (3043 segments) with suspected or known coronary artery disease by four blinded readers (reader A: most experienced - D: least experienced). The amount of ischemic and non-ischemic LGE as well as visibility (4: very good - 1: poor) of ischemic LGE was visually assessed.
RESULTS: All readers detected more infarcted segments in LGEshort compared to LGEstandard (378 segments reported as infarcted; A:p = 0.5, B:p = 0.8, C,D:p = 0.03). Scar visibility was scored higher in LGEshort by all readers (A,B:p = 0.03; C,D:p = 0.02), especially for subendocardial infarcts (A,B:p = 0.04, C,D:p = 0.02). Less experienced readers detected significantly more infarcted papillary muscles (C:p = 0.02, D:p = 0.03) in a shorter reading time in LGEshort (C:p = 0.04, D:p = 0.02). Non-ischemic LGE was equally visible in both sequences (A:p = 0.9, B:p = 0.8, C,D:p = 0.6).
CONCLUSIONS: LGEshort detects more ischemic LGE with improved scar visibility compared to LGEstandard, independent of experience level. The visibility of non-ischemic LGE is equivalent to LGEstandard. Less experienced readers can diagnose ischemic and non-ischemic LGE faster in LGEshort.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: LGEshort with its maximal operational simplicity can be used for visualization of all types of fibrosis - ischemic and non-ischemic - instead of LGEstandard, independent of experience level.
METHODS: LGEshort and LGEstandard were retrospectively evaluated in 179 patients (3043 segments) with suspected or known coronary artery disease by four blinded readers (reader A: most experienced - D: least experienced). The amount of ischemic and non-ischemic LGE as well as visibility (4: very good - 1: poor) of ischemic LGE was visually assessed.
RESULTS: All readers detected more infarcted segments in LGEshort compared to LGEstandard (378 segments reported as infarcted; A:p = 0.5, B:p = 0.8, C,D:p = 0.03). Scar visibility was scored higher in LGEshort by all readers (A,B:p = 0.03; C,D:p = 0.02), especially for subendocardial infarcts (A,B:p = 0.04, C,D:p = 0.02). Less experienced readers detected significantly more infarcted papillary muscles (C:p = 0.02, D:p = 0.03) in a shorter reading time in LGEshort (C:p = 0.04, D:p = 0.02). Non-ischemic LGE was equally visible in both sequences (A:p = 0.9, B:p = 0.8, C,D:p = 0.6).
CONCLUSIONS: LGEshort detects more ischemic LGE with improved scar visibility compared to LGEstandard, independent of experience level. The visibility of non-ischemic LGE is equivalent to LGEstandard. Less experienced readers can diagnose ischemic and non-ischemic LGE faster in LGEshort.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: LGEshort with its maximal operational simplicity can be used for visualization of all types of fibrosis - ischemic and non-ischemic - instead of LGEstandard, independent of experience level.