| Title |
Myocardial tissue characterization by combining late gadolinium enhancement imaging and percent edema mapping: a novel T2 map-based MRI method in canine myocardial infarction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Radiology Experimental, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41747-018-0037-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pal Suranyi, Gabriel A. Elgavish, U. Joseph Schoepf, Balazs Ruzsics, Pal Kiss, Marly van Assen, Brian E. Jacobs, Brigitta C. Brott, Ada Elgavish, Akos Varga-Szemes |
| Abstract |
Assessing the extent of ischemic and reperfusion-associated myocardial injuries remains challenging with current magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques. Our aim was to develop a tissue characterization mapping (TCM) technique by combining late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) with our novel percent edema mapping (PEM) approach to enable the classification of tissue represented by MRI voxels as healthy, myocardial edema (ME), necrosis, myocardial hemorrhage (MH), or scar. Six dogs underwent closed-chest myocardial infarct (MI) generation. Serial MRI scans were performed post-MI on days 3, 4, 6, 14, and 56, including T2 mapping and LGE. Dogs were sacrificed on day 4 (n = 4, acute MI) or day 56 (n = 2, chronic MI). TCMs were generated based on a voxel classification algorithm taking into account signal intensity from LGE and T2-based estimation of ME. TCM-based MI and MH were validated with post mortem triphenyl tetrazolium chloride (TTC) staining. Pearson's correlation and Bland-Altman analyses were performed. The MI, ME, and MH measured by TCM were 13.4% [25th-75th percentile 1.6-28.8], 28.1% [2.1-37.5] and 4.3% [1.0-11.3], respectively. TCM measured higher MH and MI compared to TTC (p = 0.0033 and p = 0.0007, respectively). MH size was linearly correlated with MI size by both MRI (r = 0.9528, p < 0.0001) and TTC (r = 0.9625, p < 0.0001). MH quantification demonstrated good agreement between TCM and TTC (r = 0.8766, p < 0.0001, 2.4% overestimation by TCM). A similar correlation was observed for MI size (r = 0.9429, p < 0.0001, 6.1% overestimation by TCM). Preliminary results suggest that the TCM method is feasible for the in vivo localization and quantification of various MI-related tissue components. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 33% |
| Austria | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 33% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 11% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 56% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 11% |
| Energy | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 October 2018.
All research outputs
#15,261,747
of 24,991,957 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology Experimental
#102
of 275 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,883
of 338,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology Experimental
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,991,957 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 275 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 338,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.