Respiratory motion and cardiac arrhythmia effects on diagnostic accuracy of myocardial delayed-enhanced MR imaging in canines
Respiratory motion and cardiac arrhythmia effects on diagnostic accuracy of myocardial delayed-enhanced MR imaging in canines
复制标题
DOI：
10.1148/radiol.2471070132
复制
发表时间：
2008-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
19.7
通讯作者：
Judd, Robert M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sievers, Burkhard;Rehwald, Wolfgang G.;Judd, Robert M.
目的：前瞻性地比较标准延迟增强（DE）磁共振（MR）成像与亚秒级DE MR成像在屏气和/或心律失常情况下对犬心肌梗死（MI）的诊断准确性，并以组织学结果或无手术造成MI作为参考标准。21只犬在4种条件下分别采用1种标准和2种亚秒DE MR技术进行成像：条件1，屏气和稳定门控; 2，非屏气和稳定门控; 3，屏气和不规则心律; 4，非屏气和不规则心律。随机分配图像，并对诊断准确性、图像质量和观察者置信度进行评分。分别计算每种技术和临床条件下MI检测的灵敏度、特异性和诊断准确性。采用卡方检验、配对t检验和McNemar检验进行比较。在条件2-4中，差异不显著（P > 0.05）;将数据合并并称为B组。条件1为A组。A组标准DE MR成像的准确性、图像质量和观察者置信度分别为96%、3.7 ± 0.8和2.7 ± 0.6，而B组仅为74%、2.4 ± 0.8和1.8 ± 0.7（P
Purpose: To prospectively compare in canines the diagnostic accuracy for myocardial infarction (MI) of standard delayed-enhancement (DE) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging versus that of subsecond DE MR imaging with and without breath holding and/or cardiac arrhythmia, with histologic findings or absence of surgical creation of MI as the reference standard.Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee; 21 canines were imaged with one standard and two subsecond DE MR techniques in four conditions: condition 1, breath holding and steady gating; 2, non-breath holding and steady gating; 3, breath holding and irregular heart rhythm; and 4, non-breath holding and irregular heart rhythm. Images were randomized and scored for diagnostic accuracy, image quality, and observer confidence. Sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for MI detection were calculated for each technique and clinical condition separately. The chi(2), paired t, and McNemar tests were used for comparisons.Results: Fifteen dogs had MIs. Among conditions 2-4, differences were not significant (P > .05); data were pooled and referred to as group B. Condition 1 was group A. Accuracy, image quality, and observer confidence, respectively, for standard DE MR imaging were 96%, 3.7 +/- 0.8, and 2.7 +/- 0.6 in group A but only 74%, 2.4 +/- 0.8, and 1.8 +/- 0.7 in group B (P