Heterogeneity of Fractional Anisotropy and Mean Diffusivity Measurements by In Vivo Diffusion Tensor Imaging in Normal Human Hearts

Cardiac diffusion tensor imaging (cDTI) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance has the potential to assess microstructural changes through measures of fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD). However, normal variation in regional and transmural FA and MD is not well described. Twenty norm...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2015-07, Vol.10 (7), p.e0132360-e0132360
Hauptverfasser: McGill, Laura-Ann, Scott, Andrew D, Ferreira, Pedro F, Nielles-Vallespin, Sonia, Ismail, Tevfik, Kilner, Philip J, Gatehouse, Peter D, de Silva, Ranil, Prasad, Sanjay K, Giannakidis, Archontis, Firmin, David N, Pennell, Dudley J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Cardiac diffusion tensor imaging (cDTI) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance has the potential to assess microstructural changes through measures of fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD). However, normal variation in regional and transmural FA and MD is not well described. Twenty normal subjects were scanned using an optimised cDTI sequence at 3T in systole. FA and MD were quantified in 3 transmural layers and 4 regional myocardial walls. FA was higher in the mesocardium (0.46 ±0.04) than the endocardium (0.40 ±0.04, p≤0.001) and epicardium (0.39 ±0.04, p≤0.001). On regional analysis, the FA in the septum was greater than the lateral wall (0.44 ±0.03 vs 0.40 ±0.05 p = 0.04). There was a transmural gradient in MD increasing towards the endocardium (epicardium 0.87 ±0.07 vs endocardium 0.91 ±0.08×10-3 mm2/s, p = 0.04). With the lateral wall (0.87 ± 0.08×10-3 mm2/s) as the reference, the MD was higher in the anterior wall (0.92 ±0.08×10-3 mm2/s, p = 0.016) and septum (0.92 ±0.07×10-3 mm2/s, p = 0.028). Transmurally the signal to noise ratio (SNR) was greatest in the mesocardium (14.5 ±2.5 vs endocardium 13.1 ±2.2, p
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0132360