Gated thoracic magnetic resonance angiography at 3T: noncontrast versus blood pool contrast.
Gated thoracic magnetic resonance angiography at 3T: noncontrast versus blood pool contrast.
复制标题
3T 门控胸部磁共振血管造影：非造影剂与血池造影剂。
DOI：
10.1007/s10554-017-1242-8
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Hope,MichaelD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Zhu,Chengcheng;Haraldsson,Henrik;Kallianos,Kimberly;Ge,Liang;Tseng,Elaine;Henry,Travis;Saloner,David;Hope,MichaelD
据报道，在3 T条件下，采用非对比剂和对比剂增强的方法进行门控胸部磁共振血管造影（MRA）以评价主动脉根部。我们比较了两种方法的定性和定量图像质量指标，并评估了标准主动脉测量的可重复性。在3 T下对45例患者进行了呼吸和心脏门控MRA：23例在使用铁基血池造影剂后，22例未使用造影剂。采用5分Likert量表、血管腔-肌肉对比度和血管壁清晰度评估图像质量。两名评审员测量了升主动脉直径和瓣环面积。使用Bland-Altman图和变异系数（CV）评估评价者间一致性。在胸部所有主要血管中使用血池造影剂的定性图像质量更好（平均Likert为4.20 ± 0.79 vs. 2.60 ± 0.77，p < 0.001）。所有血管的对比度越高，定量评估也越好（5.26 ± 3.3 vs. 1.90 ± 0.53，p < 0.001），主动脉瓣环和升主动脉的锐度更高（分别为0.70 ± 0.16 vs. 0.56 ± 0.14 mm−1，p < 0.001和0.87 ± 0.16 vs. 0.62 ± 0.16 mm−1，p = 0.008）。升主动脉直径的测量重现性略好（CV为2.80 vs. 3.23%），但使用血池造影剂的主动脉瓣环面积显著增加（CV为4.93 vs. 7.32%）。与非造影技术相比，使用血池造影剂进行门控胸部MRA可改善图像质量，并提供更可重复的主动脉瓣环面积测量。
Both noncontrast and contrast-enhanced approaches to gated thoracic magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for aortic root evaluation have been reported at 3T. We compare qualitative and quantitative image quality measures for the two approaches, and assess the reproducibility of standard aortic measurements. Respiratory and cardiac gated MRA of the chest was performed at 3T in 45 patients: 23 after administration of iron-based blood pool contrast, and 22 without contrast. Image quality was assessed with a 5-point Likert scale, vessel lumen-to-muscle contrast ratios, and vessel wall sharpness. Two reviewers measured the ascending aorta diameter and valve annulus area. Interrater agreement was assessed using Bland–Altman plots and coefficient of variation (CV). Qualitative image quality was better with blood pool contrast in all principal vessels of the chest (mean Likert of 4.20 ± 0.79 vs. 2.60 ± 0.77, p < 0.001). Quantitative assessment was also improved with higher contrast ratios in all vessels (5.26 ± 3.3 vs. 1.90 ± 0.53, p < 0.001), and greater sharpness of the aortic annulus and ascending aorta (0.70 ± 0.16 vs. 0.56 ± 0.14 mm−1, p < 0.001, and 0.87 ± 0.16 vs. 0.62 ± 0.16 mm−1, p = 0.008, respectively). Reproducibility of measurement was marginally better for the ascending aorta diameter (CV of 2.80 vs. 3.23%), but substantially increased for the aortic valve annulus area with blood pool contrast (CV of 4.93 vs. 7.32%). The use of a blood pool contrast agent for gated thoracic MRA improves image quality compared to a noncontrast technique, and provides more reproducible measurements of the aortic valve annulus area.