↓ Skip to main content

Robust free-breathing SASHA T1 mapping with high-contrast image registration

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Robust free-breathing SASHA T1 mapping with high-contrast image registration
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12968-016-0267-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelvin Chow, Yang Yang, Peter Shaw, Christopher M. Kramer, Michael Salerno

Abstract

Many widely used myocardial T1 mapping sequences use breath-hold acquisitions that limit the precision of calculated T1 maps. The SAturation-recovery single-SHot Acquisition (SASHA) sequence has high accuracy with robustness against systematic confounders, but has poorer precision compared to the commonly used MOdified Look-Locker Inversion recovery (MOLLI) sequence. We propose a novel method for generating high-contrast SASHA images to enable a robust image registration approach to free-breathing T1 mapping with high accuracy and precision. High-contrast (HC) images were acquired in addition to primary variable flip angle (VFA) SASHA images by collecting an additional 15 k-space lines and sharing k-space data with the primary image. The number of free-breathing images and their saturation recovery times were optimized through numerical simulations. Accuracy and precision of T1 maps using the proposed SASHA-HC sequence was compared in 10 volunteers at 1.5 T to MOLLI, a breath-hold SASHA-VFA sequence, and free-breathing SASHA-VFA data processed using conventional navigator gating and standard image registration. Free-breathing T1 maps from 15 patients and 10 volunteers were graded by blinded observers for sharpness and artifacts. Difference images calculated by subtracting HC and primary SASHA images had greater tissue-blood contrast than the primary images alone, with a 3× improvement for 700 ms TS saturation recovery images and a 6× increase in tissue-blood contrast for non-saturated images. Myocardial T1s calculated in volunteers with free-breathing SASHA-HC were similar to standard breath-hold SASHA-VFA (1156.1 ± 28.1 ms vs 1149.4 ± 26.5 ms, p >0.05). The standard deviation of myocardial T1 values using a 108 s free-breathing SASHA-HC (36.2 ± 3.1 ms) was 50 % lower (p <0.01) than breath-hold SASHA-VFA (72.7 ± 8.0 ms) and 34 % lower (p <0.01) than breath-hold MOLLI (54.7 ± 5.9 ms). T1 map quality scores in volunteers were higher with SASHA-HC (4.7 ± 0.3 out of 5) than navigator gating (3.6 ± 0.4, p <0.01) or normal registration (3.7 ± 0.4, p <0.01). SASHA-HC T1 maps had comparable precision to breath-hold MOLLI using a retrospectively down-sampled 30 s free-breathing acquisition and 30 % higher precision with a 60 s acquisition. High-contrast SASHA images enable a robust image registration approach to free-breathing T1 mapping. Free-breathing SASHA-HC provides accurate T1 maps with higher precision than MOLLI in acquisitions longer than 30 s.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Researcher 9 15%
Other 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 19 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 22%
Engineering 11 19%
Computer Science 3 5%
Physics and Astronomy 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 22 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,654,958
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#202
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,791
of 355,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#3
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.