Comparing Two T2-weighted MRI Protocols for Heart Damage Measurement
Author Information
Author(s): Lønborg Jacob, Vejlstrup Niels, Mathiasen Anders B, Thomsen Carsten, Jensen Jan S, Engstrøm Thomas
Primary Institution: Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
Hypothesis
The study aims to assess the reproducibility and compare the two most frequently used T2-weighted CMR protocols for measuring myocardial area at risk and salvage.
Conclusion
Both T2-weighted protocols are reliable for measuring myocardial area at risk and salvage index, with protocol 1 measuring slightly larger values than protocol 2.
Supporting Evidence
- Protocol 1 measures a larger area at risk and salvage index than protocol 2.
- Both protocols had high intra- and interobserver reproducibility.
- The study included 91 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
Takeaway
Doctors used two different MRI methods to see how much heart damage there was after a heart attack, and found that one method showed a bit more damage than the other.
Methodology
91 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction underwent CMR scans using two different T2-weighted protocols, and their results were compared.
Potential Biases
The analysis was performed on images obtained from the same CMR examination, which may not account for variances between different examinations.
Limitations
The study was conducted at a single center, and results may vary with different systems or protocols.
Participant Demographics
Patients were mostly male (79%), with an average age of 60 years and a mean BMI of 27 kg/m2.
Statistical Information
P-Value
<0.01
Statistical Significance
p<0.01
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website