↓ Skip to main content

Cardiac T2-mapping using a fast gradient echo spin echo sequence - first in vitro and in vivo experience

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Cardiac T2-mapping using a fast gradient echo spin echo sequence - first in vitro and in vivo experience
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12968-015-0177-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bettina Baeßler, Frank Schaarschmidt, Christian Stehning, Bernhard Schnackenburg, David Maintz, Alexander C. Bunck

Abstract

The aim of this study was the evaluation of a fast Gradient Spin Echo Technique (GraSE) for cardiac T2-mapping, combining a robust estimation of T2 relaxation times with short acquisition times. The sequence was compared against two previously introduced T2-mapping techniques in a phantom and in vivo. Phantom experiments were performed at 1.5 T using a commercially available cylindrical gel phantom. Three different T2-mapping techniques were compared: a Multi Echo Spin Echo (MESE; serving as a reference), a T2-prepared balanced Steady State Free Precession (T2prep) and a Gradient Spin Echo sequence. For the subsequent in vivo study, 12 healthy volunteers were examined on a clinical 1.5 T scanner. The three T2-mapping sequences were performed at three short-axis slices. Global myocardial T2 relaxation times were calculated and statistical analysis was performed. For assessment of pixel-by-pixel homogeneity, the number of segments showing an inhomogeneous T2 value distribution, as defined by a pixel SD exceeding 20 % of the corresponding observed T2 time, was counted. Phantom experiments showed a greater difference of measured T2 values between T2prep and MESE than between GraSE and MESE, especially for species with low T1 values. Both, GraSE and T2prep resulted in an overestimation of T2 times compared to MESE. In vivo, significant differences between mean T2 times were observed. In general, T2prep resulted in lowest (52.4 ± 2.8 ms) and GraSE in highest T2 estimates (59.3 ± 4.0 ms). Analysis of pixel-by-pixel homogeneity revealed the least number of segments with inhomogeneous T2 distribution for GraSE-derived T2 maps. The GraSE sequence is a fast and robust sequence, combining advantages of both MESE and T2prep techniques, which promises to enable improved clinical applicability of T2-mapping in the future. Our study revealed significant differences of derived mean T2 values when applying different sequence designs. Therefore, a systematic comparison of different cardiac T2-mapping sequences and the establishment of dedicated reference values should be the goal of future studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 23%
Researcher 13 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Student > Master 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 38%
Engineering 10 16%
Physics and Astronomy 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Computer Science 3 5%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 14 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 August 2015.
All research outputs
#15,267,106
of 25,522,520 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#951
of 1,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,544
of 276,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#32
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,522,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 276,672 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.