Publication

Back to overview Show all

Original article (peer-reviewed)

Journal Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
Page(s) mrm.28101 - mrm.28101
Title of proceedings Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
DOI 10.1002/mrm.28101

Open Access

URL https://serval.unil.ch/fr/notice/serval:BIB_DE6785379581
Type of Open Access Green OA Embargo (Freely available via Repository after an embargo)

Abstract

PURPOSE: Navigator-gated 3D bSSFP whole-heart coronary MRA has been evaluated in several large studies including a multi-center trial. Patient studies have also been performed with more recent self-navigated techniques. In this study, these two approaches are compared side-by-side using a Cartesian navigator-gated and corrected (CNG) and a 3D radial self-navigated (RSN) protocol from published patient studies. METHODS: Sixteen healthy subjects were examined with both sequences on a 1.5T scanner. Assessment of the visibility of coronary ostia and quantitative comparisons of acquisition times, blood pool homogeneity, and visible length and sharpness of the right coronary artery (RCA) and the combined left main (LM)+left anterior descending (LAD) coronary arteries were performed. Paired sample t-tests with P < .05 considered statistically significant were used for all comparisons. RESULTS: The acquisition time was 5:40 ± 0:28 min (mean ± SD) for RSN, being significantly shorter than the 16:59 ± 5:05 min of CNG (P < .001). RSN images showed higher blood pool homogeneity (P < .001). All coronary ostia were visible with both techniques. CNG provided significantly higher vessel sharpness in the RCA (CNG: 50.0 ± 8.6%, RSN: 34.2 ± 6.9%, P < .001) and the LM+LAD (CNG: 48.7 ± 6.7%, RSN: 32.3 ± 7.1%, P < .001). The visible vessel length was significantly longer in the LM+LAD using CNG (CNG: 9.8 ± 2.7 cm, RSN: 8.5 ± 2.6 cm, P < .05) but not in the RCA (CNG: 9.7 ± 2.3 cm, RSN: 9.3 ± 2.9 cm, P = .29). CONCLUSION: CNG provided superior vessel sharpness and might hence be the better option for examining coronary lumina. However, its blood pool inhomogeneity and prolonged and unpredictable acquisition times compared to RSN may make clinical adoption more challenging.
-