Evaluation of Third‐Order Motion‐Compensated Cardiac Diffusion Tensor Imaging Across Cardiac Phases Using an Ultra‐High‐Performance Clinical Scanner
Rattachement africain : gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
PURPOSE: To evaluate a third-order motion-compensated spin echo (M3-MCSE) sequence at multiple cardiac phases on a clinical 3 T MRI scanner with ultra-high performance (UHP) gradients (200 mT/m), compared with stimulated echo acquisition mode (STEAM) and second-order MCSE (M2-MCSE) for cardiac diffusion tensor imaging (cDTI). METHODS: Twenty healthy subjects underwent mid-ventricular short-axis cDTI at peak systole and diastasis using STEAM, M2-MCSE, and M3-MCSE. cDTI metrics and image quality were compared. In five additional healthy subjects, diffusion-weighted images were obtained at multiple trigger delays distributed over diastasis to assess motion-induced signal loss. RESULTS: ), with no significant difference in mean diffusivity, fractional anisotropy, helix angle transmurality or sheetlet angle in systole/diastole. STEAM-derived apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) were consistent across diastasis, while ADC for MCSE sequences increased at sub-optimal trigger delays. CONCLUSION: UHP gradients enabled in vivo evaluation of M3-MCSE, showing superior systolic cDTI but reduced diastolic performance versus M2-MCSE due to reduced signal-to-noise ratio and a longer motion-sensitive window. Future work may consider numerically optimized gradient designs to enhance MCSE robustness throughout the cardiac cycle.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Evaluation of Third‐Order Motion‐Compensated Cardiac Diffusion Tensor Imaging Across Cardiac Phases Using an Ultra‐High‐Performance Clinical Scanner
- Date Crossref
- 22/04/2026
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.