Performance of two Methods for Cardiac MRI Edema Mapping: Dual-Contrast Fast Spin-Echo and T 2Prepared Balanced Steady State Free Precession

Abstract

Purpose To compare true positive and false negative results of myocardial edema mapping in two methods. Myocardial edema may be difficult to detect on cardiac MRI. Materials and Methods 76 patients (age 59±11 years, 15 female) with acute myocardial infarction (MI) and 10 healthy volunteers were prospectively included in this single-center study. 1.5T cardiac MRI was performed in patients 2.5 days after revascularization (median) for edema mapping: Steady State Free Precession (SSFP) mapping sequence with T 2-preparation pulses (T 2prep); and dual-contrast Fast Spin-Echo (dcFSE) signal decay edema mapping. Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) was used as the reference for expected edema in acute MI. Results 311 myocardial segments in patients were acutely infarcted with mean T 273ms for T 2prep SSFP vs. 87ms for dcFSE edema mapping. In healthy volunteers the mean T 2was 56ms for T 2prep SSFP vs. 50ms for dcFSE edema mapping. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for T 2prep SSFP show area under the curve (AUC) 0.962, p<0.0001, Youden index J 0.8266, associated criterion >60ms, sensitivity 94%, specificity 89%. dcFSE ROC AUC 0.979, p<0.0001, J 0.9219, associated criterion >64ms, sensitivity 93%, specificity 99%. Conclusion Both edema mapping methods indicate high-grade edema with high sensitivity. Nevertheless, edema in acute infarction may be focally underestimated in both mapping methods. Key Points: Sensitivity for edema detection is high for both methods. Edema may be focally underestimated by T 2prep SSFP edema mapping and dcFSE mapping. Citation Format Krumm P, Martirosian P, Rath D etal. Performance of two Methods for Cardiac MRI Edema Mapping: Dual-Contrast Fast Spin-Echo and T 2Prepared Balanced Steady State Free Precession. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2020; 192: 669-677.