Myocardial T1 and T2 Mapping at 5.0T: Feasibility and Comparison with 3.0-T MRI.

IF 5 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Qinfang Miao, Hongzhang Huang, Zhenfeng Lyu, Wenjian Liu, Tianyi Wu, Peng Hu, Haikun Qi
{"title":"Myocardial T1 and T2 Mapping at 5.0T: Feasibility and Comparison with 3.0-T MRI.","authors":"Qinfang Miao, Hongzhang Huang, Zhenfeng Lyu, Wenjian Liu, Tianyi Wu, Peng Hu, Haikun Qi","doi":"10.1016/j.jocmr.2026.102787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Myocardial T1 and T2 mapping provide a non-invasive quantitative assessment of cardiac tissue. While established at 1.5-T and 3.0-T MRI, the mapping performance and reference values at 5.0-T MRI remain to be investigated. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and establish reference values for cardiac T1 and T2 mapping at 5.0-T MRI in healthy subjects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective study, 50 healthy volunteers underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance at both 3.0-T and 5.0-T systems from February to April 2025. Mapping protocols included MOdified Look Locker Inversion recovery (MOLLI, T1), T2-prepared gradient-echo (T2-prep-GRE, T2), and a simultaneous multi-parametric mapping technique (Multimap, T1 and T2). At 3.0-T MRI, both balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) and fast low-angle shot (FLASH) readouts were employed, while only the FLASH readout was used at 5.0-T MRI. Segment exclusion rates were analyzed at the subject-level using nonparametric tests with Holm correction for multiple comparisons. Measurement repeatability (intra-observer, scan-rescan) and reproducibility (inter-observer) were assessed by coefficient of variation (CoV), repeatability coefficient (RC), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Systematic difference and agreement between repeated measurements were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. Group-level variability was described by mean ± SD across subjects. Group comparisons were performed with repeated measures ANOVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All techniques at 5.0-T MRI yielded high-quality images that were predominantly free of visible artifacts with the FLASH readout. After quality control, segment acceptance rates ranged from 87.8% to 94.0%, and matched FLASH-readout comparisons showed higher exclusion rates at 5.0T than at 3.0T (all P < 0.001). Native T1 values were significantly higher at 5.0T than at 3.0-T MRI (MOLLI: 1452.9 ± 33.2 ms vs. 1305.9 ± 38.3 ms, P < 0.0001), while T2 values were significantly lower (T2-prep-GRE: 37.53 ± 1.74 ms vs. 43.97 ± 2.95 ms, P < 0.0001). Scan-rescan repeatability at 5.0-T (ICC: 0.87-0.92; CoV: 1.25%-2.17%; RC: 3.45%-6.01%) was comparable to 3.0-T MRI. Measurement precision, as assessed by CoV, RC, and ICC, was higher for 5.0-T than 3.0-T with FLASH, and lower than bSSFP-based techniques. Multimap enabled efficient, simultaneous T1 and T2 quantification with acceptable reproducibility at 5.0-T.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Myocardial T1 and T2 mapping at 5.0-T MRI are reliable and reproducible in healthy individuals, offering reference values for normal myocardium at this field strength. The good measurement reproducibility and precision of 5.0-T cardiac mapping support its clinical potential for myocardial tissue characterization.</p>","PeriodicalId":15221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance","volume":" ","pages":"102787"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocmr.2026.102787","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Myocardial T1 and T2 mapping provide a non-invasive quantitative assessment of cardiac tissue. While established at 1.5-T and 3.0-T MRI, the mapping performance and reference values at 5.0-T MRI remain to be investigated. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and establish reference values for cardiac T1 and T2 mapping at 5.0-T MRI in healthy subjects.

Methods: In this prospective study, 50 healthy volunteers underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance at both 3.0-T and 5.0-T systems from February to April 2025. Mapping protocols included MOdified Look Locker Inversion recovery (MOLLI, T1), T2-prepared gradient-echo (T2-prep-GRE, T2), and a simultaneous multi-parametric mapping technique (Multimap, T1 and T2). At 3.0-T MRI, both balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) and fast low-angle shot (FLASH) readouts were employed, while only the FLASH readout was used at 5.0-T MRI. Segment exclusion rates were analyzed at the subject-level using nonparametric tests with Holm correction for multiple comparisons. Measurement repeatability (intra-observer, scan-rescan) and reproducibility (inter-observer) were assessed by coefficient of variation (CoV), repeatability coefficient (RC), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Systematic difference and agreement between repeated measurements were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. Group-level variability was described by mean ± SD across subjects. Group comparisons were performed with repeated measures ANOVA.

Results: All techniques at 5.0-T MRI yielded high-quality images that were predominantly free of visible artifacts with the FLASH readout. After quality control, segment acceptance rates ranged from 87.8% to 94.0%, and matched FLASH-readout comparisons showed higher exclusion rates at 5.0T than at 3.0T (all P < 0.001). Native T1 values were significantly higher at 5.0T than at 3.0-T MRI (MOLLI: 1452.9 ± 33.2 ms vs. 1305.9 ± 38.3 ms, P < 0.0001), while T2 values were significantly lower (T2-prep-GRE: 37.53 ± 1.74 ms vs. 43.97 ± 2.95 ms, P < 0.0001). Scan-rescan repeatability at 5.0-T (ICC: 0.87-0.92; CoV: 1.25%-2.17%; RC: 3.45%-6.01%) was comparable to 3.0-T MRI. Measurement precision, as assessed by CoV, RC, and ICC, was higher for 5.0-T than 3.0-T with FLASH, and lower than bSSFP-based techniques. Multimap enabled efficient, simultaneous T1 and T2 quantification with acceptable reproducibility at 5.0-T.

Conclusion: Myocardial T1 and T2 mapping at 5.0-T MRI are reliable and reproducible in healthy individuals, offering reference values for normal myocardium at this field strength. The good measurement reproducibility and precision of 5.0-T cardiac mapping support its clinical potential for myocardial tissue characterization.

5.0T心肌T1、T2成像的可行性及与3.0 t MRI的比较。
背景:心肌T1和T2制图提供了一种无创的心脏组织定量评估。虽然在1.5-T和3.0-T MRI上建立,但在5.0-T MRI上的制图性能和参考值仍有待研究。本研究旨在评估5.0-T MRI在健康受试者心脏T1、T2定位的可行性,并建立参考值。方法:在这项前瞻性研究中,50名健康志愿者于2025年2月至4月在3.0-T和5.0-T系统下接受了心血管磁共振。测绘协议包括MOdified Look Locker反演恢复(MOLLI, T1)、T2制备的梯度回波(T2-prep- gre, T2)和同步多参数测绘技术(Multimap, T1和T2)。3.0 t MRI同时使用平衡稳态自由进动(bSSFP)和快速低角度拍摄(FLASH)读数,而5.0 t MRI仅使用FLASH读数。在受试者水平上,使用非参数检验和多重比较的Holm校正来分析片段排除率。通过变异系数(CoV)、可重复性系数(RC)和类内相关系数(ICC)评估测量重复性(观察者内、扫描扫描)和再现性(观察者间)。使用Bland-Altman分析评估重复测量之间的系统差异和一致性。组水平变异性用受试者间的平均值±标准差来描述。组间比较采用重复测量方差分析。结果:所有5.0-T MRI技术都产生了高质量的图像,FLASH读数主要没有可见的伪影。经过质量控制,片段接受率从87.8%到94.0%不等,匹配的flash读数比较显示5.0T时的排除率高于3.0T(均P < 0.001)。5.0T时的T1值明显高于3.0 t时的T1值(MOLLI: 1452.9±33.2 ms比1305.9±38.3 ms, P < 0.0001), T2值明显低于3.0 t时的T1值(T2-prep- gre: 37.53±1.74 ms比43.97±2.95 ms, P < 0.0001)。5.0 t扫描扫描的重复性(ICC: 0.87-0.92; CoV: 1.25%-2.17%; RC: 3.45%-6.01%)与3.0 t MRI相当。根据CoV、RC和ICC评估,5.0-T的测量精度高于FLASH的3.0-T,低于基于bssfp的技术。Multimap实现了高效,同时T1和T2定量,在5.0-T下具有可接受的再现性。结论:5.0 t MRI心肌T1、T2成像在健康人身上可靠、可重复性好,对正常心肌在该场强下的成像具有参考价值。5.0-T心脏测图具有良好的测量再现性和精度,支持其在心肌组织表征方面的临床应用潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) publishes high-quality articles on all aspects of basic, translational and clinical research on the design, development, manufacture, and evaluation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) methods applied to the cardiovascular system. Topical areas include, but are not limited to: New applications of magnetic resonance to improve the diagnostic strategies, risk stratification, characterization and management of diseases affecting the cardiovascular system. New methods to enhance or accelerate image acquisition and data analysis. Results of multicenter, or larger single-center studies that provide insight into the utility of CMR. Basic biological perceptions derived by CMR methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书