Simultaneous Mapping of T₁ and T₂ Using Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting in a Cohort of Healthy Subjects at 1.5T

Background: Cardiac MR fingerprinting (cMRF) is a novel technique for simultaneous T₁ and T₂ mapping.

Purpose: To compare T₁ /T₂ measurements, repeatability, and map quality between cMRF and standard mapping techniques in healthy subjects.

Study type: Prospective.

Population: In all, 58 subjects (ages 18-60). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: cMRF, modified Look-Locker inversion recovery (MOLLI), and T₂ -prepared balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) at 1.5T.

Assessment: T₁ /T₂ values were measured in 16 myocardial segments at apical, medial, and basal slice positions. Test-retest and intrareader repeatability were assessed for the medial slice. cMRF and conventional mapping sequences were compared using ordinal and two alternative forced choice (2AFC) ratings.

Statistical tests: Paired t-tests, Bland-Altman analyses, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), linear regression, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and binomial tests.

Results: Average T₁ measurements were: basal 1007.4±96.5 msec (cMRF), 990.0±45.3 msec (MOLLI); medial 995.0±101.7 msec (cMRF), 995.6±59.7 msec (MOLLI); apical 1006.6±111.2 msec (cMRF); and 981.6±87.6 msec (MOLLI). Average T₂ measurements were: basal 40.9±7.0 msec (cMRF), 46.1±3.5 msec (bSSFP); medial 41.0±6.4 msec (cMRF), 47.4±4.1 msec (bSSFP); apical 43.5±6.7 msec (cMRF), 48.0±4.0 msec (bSSFP). A statistically significant bias (cMRF T₁ larger than MOLLI T₁ ) was observed in basal (17.4 msec) and apical (25.0 msec) slices. For T₂ , a statistically significant bias (cMRF lower than bSSFP) was observed for basal (-5.2 msec), medial (-6.3 msec), and apical (-4.5 msec) slices. Precision was lower for cMRF-the average of the standard deviation measured within each slice was 102 msec for cMRF vs. 61 msec for MOLLI T₁ , and 6.4 msec for cMRF vs. 4.0 msec for bSSFP T₂ . cMRF and conventional techniques had similar test-retest repeatability as quantified by ICC (0.87 cMRF vs. 0.84 MOLLI for T₁ ; 0.85 cMRF vs. 0.85 bSSFP for T₂ ). In the ordinal image quality comparison, cMRF maps scored higher than conventional sequences for both T₁ (all five features) and T₂ (four features).

Data conclusion: This work reports on myocardial T₁ /T₂ measurements in healthy subjects using cMRF and standard mapping sequences. cMRF had slightly lower precision, similar test-retest and intrareader repeatability, and higher scores for map quality.

Evidence level: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;52:1044-1052.