↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of different cardiovascular magnetic resonance sequences for native myocardial T1 mapping at 3T

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd), October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Comparison of different cardiovascular magnetic resonance sequences for native myocardial T1 mapping at 3T
Published in
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd), October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12968-016-0286-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tiago Teixeira, Tarik Hafyane, Nikola Stikov, Cansu Akdeniz, Andreas Greiser, Matthias G. Friedrich

Abstract

T1 mapping based on cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is a novel approach using the magnetic relaxation T1 time as a quantitative marker for myocardial tissue composition. Various T1 mapping sequences are being used, with different strengths and weaknesses. Data comparing different sequences head to head however are sparse. We compared three T1 mapping sequences, ShMOLLI, MOLLI and SASHA in phantoms and in a mid-ventricular slice of 40 healthy individuals (mean age 59 ± 7 years, 45 % male) with low (68 %) or moderate cardiovascular risk. We calculated global and segmental T1 in vivo through exponential curve fitting and subsequent parametric mapping. We also analyzed image quality and inter-observer reproducibility. There was no association of T1 with cardiovascular risk groups. T1 however differed significantly depending on the sequence, with SASHA providing consistently higher mean values than ShMOLLI and MOLLI (1487 ± 36 ms vs. 1174 ± 37 ms and 1199 ± 28 ms, respectively; p < 0.001). This difference between sequences was much smaller in phantom measurements. In patients, segmental values were lower in the anterior wall for all sequences. Image quality, in general good for the steady-state-free-precession readouts in all sequences, was lower for SASHA parametric maps. On multivariate regression analysis, a longer T1 measured by MOLLI was correlated with lower ejection fraction and female gender. Inter-observer variability as assessed by intra-class correlation coefficients was excellent for all sequences (ShMOLLI: 0.995; MOLLI: 0.991; SASHA: 0.961; all p < 0.001). In a cross-sectional population with low to moderate cardiovascular risk, we observed a variation in T1 mapping results between inversion-recovery vs. saturation-recovery sequences in vivo, which were less evident in phantom images, despite a small interobserver variability. Thus, physiological factors, most likely related to B1 inhomogeneities, and tissue-specific properties, like magnetization transfer, that impact T1 values in vivo, render phantom validation insufficient, and have to be further investigated for a better understanding of the clinical utility of different T1 mapping approaches. "Canadian Alliance For Healthy Hearts and Minds" - ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02220582 ; registered August 18, 2014.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Other 5 7%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 18 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 33%
Engineering 9 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Computer Science 2 3%
Physics and Astronomy 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 22 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 08 May 2022.
All research outputs
#4,230,432
of 21,749,791 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd)
#314
of 1,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,123
of 293,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd)
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,749,791 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,239 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 293,317 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them