Download PDF
Rofo 2013; 185(3): 209-218
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1330763
Übersicht
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Klinischer Stellenwert und Indikationen zur Magnetresonanztomografie des Herzens 2013: Ein interdisziplinäres Expertenstatement

Clinical Relevance and Indications for Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging 2013: An Interdisciplinary Expert Statement
K. Hergan
1   Universitätsinstitut für Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Salzburg
,
S. Globits
2   Herz-Kreislauf-Zentrum Groß Gerungs
,
H. Schuchlenz
3   Department für Kardiologie/Intensivmedizin, Landeskrankenhaus Graz-West
,
B. Kaiser
4   DZU, Diagnosezentrum Urania, Wien
,
N. Fiegl
5   Kardiologie, KH Hietzing Wien
,
A. Artmann
6   Radiologisches Institut, Wels
,
K. Hawlisch
5   Kardiologie, KH Hietzing Wien
,
S. Newrkla
7   Radiologie, SMZ Ost Wien
,
M. Gessner
8   2. Medizinische Abteilung, Kardiologie, Hanusch Krankenhaus Wien
,
R. Bernt
9   Radiologie, Hanusch-Krankenhaus
,
J. Schuler
10   2. Medizinische Abteilung/Kardiologie, Universitätsklinikum Salzburg, Paracelsus Medizinische Privatuniversität
,
G. Friedrich
11   Universitätsklinik für Innere Medizin 3, Kardiologie, Medizinische Universität Innsbruck
,
T. Trieb
12   Universitätsklinik für Radiologie, Medizinische Universität Innsbruck
,
F. Wolf
13   Universitätsklinik für Radiodiagnostik, Medizinische Universität Wien
,
G. Reiter
14   Siemens AG, Healthcare Division, Graz, Austria
,
E. Sorantin
15   Universitätsklinik für Radiologie, klin. Abteilung für Kinderradiologie, Medizinische Universität Graz
,
C. Loewe
13   Universitätsklinik für Radiodiagnostik, Medizinische Universität Wien
,
A. Gamillscheg
16   Universitätsklinik für Kinder- und Jugendheilkunde, klinische Abteilung f. pädiatrische Kardiologie, Medizinische Universität Graz
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

18 June 2012

06 August 2012

Publication Date:
25 February 2013 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Obwohl in den letzten Jahren wissenschaftlich weitere Indikationen für die Magnetresonanztomografie (MRT) des Herzens erarbeitet wurden, hat sich die Akzeptanz dieser Untersuchungstechnik in Klinik und Praxis bei den Kardiologen und Radiologen nicht mit der gleichen Geschwindigkeit entwickelt wie die diagnostischen Möglichkeiten. Verantwortlich dafür sind unter anderem die notwendige kostspielige Ausstattung, die relativ lange Untersuchungszeit, das hohe Maß an technischem Wissen und nicht zuletzt die fehlende oder unzureichende Remuneration. Darüber hinaus sind ein Festhalten an traditionellen Abklärungsalgorithmen, ein limitierter Zugang zu dieser Technologie sowie Probleme in der fächerübergreifenden Kooperation zu beobachten. Die seit vielen Jahren bestehende interdisziplinäre Kooperation hat die Aufgabe, einen substanziellen Beitrag zur Überwindung der genannten Problemfelder zu leisten und die MRT des Herzens in das Abklärungsspektrum kardialer Erkrankungen als fixen Bestandteil zu integrieren. Eine kontinuierliche Verbesserung der Behandlung von Patienten mittels kosteneffizienter Diagnostik und Therapie hat hierbei höchste Priorität. Die MRT des Herzens spielt dabei eine bedeutende Rolle.

Abstract

During the last years the indications of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging (CMRI) have been continuously expanded. However, the acceptance of the method by cardiologists and radiologists does not correlate with respect to the diagnostic potential. Several factors, such as expensive equipment, relatively long examination times, high technical know how and lack of remuneration, limit the application of CMRI in everyday clinical practice. Furthermore, doctors tend to apply more conventional, well established diagnostic procedures, the access to the method is still limited and there exist difficulties in the interdisciplinary collaboration. The interdisciplinary Austrian approach to Cardiac Imaging is aimed to improve the aforementioned problems and to support the implementation of CMRI in the diagnostic tree of cardiac diseases thus enabling a cost efficient management of patients in cardiology.

Key words

cardiac - MR-imaging - heart
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Achenbach S, Barkhausen J, Beer M et al. Konsensusempfehlungen der DRG/DGK/DGPK zum Einsatz der Herzbildgebung mit Computertomografie und Magnetresonanztomografie. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2012; 184: 345-368
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hergan K, Globits S, Loewe C et al. Aktueller Stellenwert der MSCTA in der Koronargefassdiagnostik (2011): Klinischer Leitfaden der Osterreichischen Gesellschaften fur Kardiologie und Radiologie. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2011; 183: 964-971
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lotz J, Kivelitz D, Fischbach R et al. Empfehlungen für den Einsatz der Computertomografie und Magnetresonanztomografie in der Herzdiagnostik. Teil 2 – Magnetresonanztomografie. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2009; 181: 800-814
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Pennell DJ, Sechtem UP, Higgins CB et al. Clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR): Consensus Panel report. Eur Heart J 2004; 25: 1940-1965
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 de Jong MC, Genders TSS, van Geuns RJ et al. Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol (electronically published) DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2434-1.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Nandalur KR, Dwamena BA, Choudhri AF et al. Diagnostic performance of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50: 1343-1353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Schwitter J, Wacker CM, Wilke N et al. MR-IMPACT II: Magnetic resonance imaging for myocardial perfusion assessment in coronary artery disease trial: perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance vs. single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparative multicentre, multivendor trial. Eur Heart J 2012; (first published online March 4, 2012)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Greenwood JP, Maredia N, Younger JF et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and single-photon emission computed tomography for diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CE-MARK): a prospective trial. Lancet 2012; 379: 453-460
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Watkins S, McGeoch R, Lyne J et al. Validation of Magnetic Resonance Myocardial Perfusion Imaging With Fractional Flow Reserve for the Detection of Significant Coronary Heart Disease. Circulation 2009; 120: 2207-2213
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Chung SY, Lee KY, Chun EJ et al. Comparison of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven threevessel coronary artery disease. Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195: 356-362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Klug G, Mayr A, Schenk S et al. Prognostic value at 5 years of microvascular obstruction after acute myocardial infarction assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2012; 14: 46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Grothues F, Smith GC, Moon JC et al. Comparison of interstudy reproducibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance with two-dimensional echocardiography in normal subjects and in patients with heart failure or left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Cardiol 2002; 90: 29-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V et al. Standardized Myocardial Segmentation and Nomenclature for Tomographic Imaging of the Heart: A Statement for Healthcare Proffessionals From the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation 2002; 105: 539-542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Allman KC, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R et al. Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39: 1151-1158
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Kim RJ, Wu E, Rafael A et al. The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1445-1453
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Wellnhofer E, Olariu A, Klein C et al. Magnetic resonance low-dose dobutamine test is superior to scar quantification for the prediction of functional recovery. Circulation 2004; 109: 2172-2174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kim RJ, Manning WJ. Viability assessment by delayed enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: will low-dose dobutamine dull the shine?. Circulation 2004; 109: 2476-2479
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 White JA, Yee R, Yuan X et al. Delayed enhancement magnetic resonance imaging predicts response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with intraventricular dyssynchrony. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48: 1953-1960
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chalil S, Foley P, Muyhaldeen S et al. Late gadolinium enhancement-cardiovascular magnetic resonance as a predictor of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy. Europace 2007; 9: 1031-1037
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Maron BJ, Towbin JA, Thiene G et al. Contemporary definitions and classification of the cardiomyopathies. A scientific statement of the American Heart Association. Circulation 2006; 113: 1807-1816
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Karamitsos TD, Francis JM, Myerson S. The role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54: 1407-1424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Nathan M, Chia YL, Croisille P et al. Assessment of Myocardial Fibrosis With Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 57: 891-903
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Leyva F. Cardiac resynchronization therapy guided by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2010; 12: 64-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Leyva F, Foley PW, Chalil S et al. Cardiac resynchronisation therapy guided by late gadolinium-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2011; 13: 29-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Pankuweit S, Richter A, Ruppert V et al. Classification of cardiomyopathies and indication for endomyocardial biopsy revisited. Herz 2009; 34: 55-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Elliott P, Andersson B, Arbustini E et al. Classification of the cardiomyopathies: a position statement from the european society of cardiology working group on myocardial and pericardial diseases. Eur Heart J 2008; 29: 270-276
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 McCrohon JA, Moon JC, Prasad SK et al. Differentiation of heart failure related to dilated cardiomyopathy and coronary artery disease using gadolinium enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation 2003; 108: 54-59
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gersh BJ, Maron BJ, Bonow RO et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines developed in collaboration with the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 58: 2703-2738
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 White JA, Fine NM, Gula L et al. Utility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in identifying substrate for malignant ventricular arrhythmias. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012; 5: 12-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Jenni R, Oechslin E, Schneider J et al. Echocardiographic and pathoanatomical characteristics of isolated left ventricular noncompaction: a step towards classification as a distinct cardiomyopathy. Heart 2001; 86: 666-671
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Petersen SE, Selvanayagam JB, Wiesmann F. Left Ventricular Non-Compaction: Insights From Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46: 101-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Dursun M, Agayev A, Ertugrul T et al. MR imaging features of ventricular noncompaction: Emphasis on distribution and pattern of fibrosis. Eur J Radiol 2010; 74: 147-151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Fernández-Pérez GC, Anguilar-Arjona JA, Tardáguilla de la Fuente G et al. Takotsubo cardiomyopathy: Assessment with cardiac MRI. Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195: W139-W145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Sharkey SW, Windenburg DC, Lesser JR et al. Natural History and Expansive Clinical Profile of Stress (Tako-Tsubo) Cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 55: 333-341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Masui T, Finck S, Higgins CB. Constrictive pericarditis and restrictive cardiomyopathy: evaluation with MR imaging. Radiology 1992; 182: 369-373
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Mahrholdt H, Wagner A, Judd RM et al. Delayed enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of non-ischaemic cardiomyopathies. Eur Heart J 2005; 26: 1461-1474
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Cheng H, Zhao S, Jiang S et al. The relative atrial volume ratio and late gadolinium enhancement provide additive information to differentiate constrictive pericarditis from restrictive cardiomyopathy. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2011; 13: 15-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Breuckmann F, Maderwald S, Buhr C et al. Cardiac MRI: estimation of changes in normalized myocardial gadolinium accumulation over time after contrast injection in patients with acute myocarditis and healthy volunteers. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2011; 183: 933-938
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Friedrich MG, Sechtem U, Schulz-Menger J et al. Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Myocarditis: A JACC White Paper. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 53: 1475-1487
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Frank H, Globits S. Magnetic Resonance Imaging evaluation of myocardial and pericardial disease. JMRI 1999; 10: 617-626
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Laissy JP, Hyafil F, Juliard JM et al. Differentiating acute myocardial infarction from Myocarditis: Diagnostic value of early- and delayed-perfusion cardiac MR imaging. Radiology 2005; 237: 75-82
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Goitein O, Matetzky S, Beinart R et al. Acute myocarditis: non-invasive evaluation with cardiac MRI and transthoracic echocardiography. Am J Roentgenol 2008; 192: 254-258
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Gahide G, Bertrand D, Roubille F et al. MR delayed enhancement imaging findings in suspected acute myocarditis. Eur Radiol 2010; 20: 65-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Gutberlet M, Spors B, Thoma T et al. Suspected chronic myocarditis at cardiac CT: diagnostic accuracy and association with immunohistological detected inflammation and viral persistence. Radiology 2008; 246: 401-409
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Yilmaz A, Kindermann I, Kindermann M et al. Comparative evaluation of left and right ventricular endomyocardial biopsy: differences in complication rate and diagnostic performance. Circulation 2010; 122: 900-909
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Mahrhold H, Goedecke C, Wagner A et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of human myocarditis: a comparison to histology and molecular pathology. Circulation 2004; 109: 1250-1258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Keller D, Osswald S, Bremerich J. Arrhythmogenic rightventricular dysplasia: diagnostic and prognostic value of cardiac MRI in relation to arrhythmia free survival. Int J Card Imaging 2003; 19: 537-543
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Kayser HW, van der Wall EE, Sivananthan MU et al. Diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasie: a review. Radiographics 2002; 22: 639-648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Marcus FI, Zareba W, Calkins H et al. Arrhytmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia clinical presentation and diagnostic evaluation: results from the North American Multidisciplinary Study. Heart Rhythm 2009; 6: 984-992
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Bluemke DA, Krupinski EA, Ovitt T et al. MRI Imaging of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy: morphological findings and intraobserver reliability. Cardiology 2003; 99: 153-612
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Marcus FI, McKenna WJ, Sherrill D et al. Diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia: proposed modification of the task force criteria. Circulation 2010; 121: 1533-1541
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Globits S, Kreiner G, Frank H et al. Significance of morphological abnormalities detected by MRI in patients undergoing successful ablation of right ventricular outflow tract tachycardia. Circulation 1997; 96: 2633-2640
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Wang ZJ, Reddy GP, Gotway MB et al. CT and MR imaging of pericardial disease. Radiographics 2003; 23: S167-S180
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Masui T, Finck S, Higgins CB. Constrictive pericarditis and restrictive cardiomyopathy: evaluation with MR imaging. Radiology 1992; 182: 369-373
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Sechtem U, Tscholakoff D, Higgins CB. MRI of the abnormal pericardium. Am J Roentgenol 1986; 147: 239-244
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Lam KY, Dickens P, Chan AC. Tumors of the heart. A 20-year experience with a review of 12,485 consecutive autopsies. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1993; 117: 1027-1031
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Hoffmann U, Globits S, Schima W et al. Usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging of cardiac and paracardiac masses. Am J Cardiol 2003; 92: 890-895
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Aurigemma G, Reichek N, Schiebler M et al. Evaluation of aortic regurgitation by cardiac cine MRI: planar analysis and comparison to Doppler echocardiography. Cardiology 1991; 78: 340-347
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Wagner S, Auffermann W, Buser P et al. Diagnostic accuracy and estimation of the severity of valvular regurgitation from the signal void on cine magnetic resonance imaging. Am Heart J 1989; 118: 760-767
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Glockner JF, Johnston DL, McGee KP. Evaluation of cardiac valvular disease with MR imaging: Qualitative and quantitative techniques. Radiographics 2003; 23: e9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Nishimura F. Oblique cine MRI for the evaluation of aortic regurgitation: comparison with cineangiography. Clin Cardiol 1992; 15: 73-78
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Globits S, Frank F, Mayr H et al. Quantitative assessment of aortic regurgitation by magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Heart J 1992 13: 78-83
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Sondergaard L, Lindvig K, Hildebrandt P et al. Quantification of aortic regurgitation by magnetic resonance velocity mapping. Am Heart J 1993; 125: 1081-1090
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Fujita N, Chazouilleres AF, Hartiala JJ et al. Quantification of mitral regurgitation by velocity-encoded cine nuclear magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 951-958
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Morris MF, Maleszewski JJ, Suri RM et al. CT and MR imaging of the mitral valve: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics 2010; 30: 603-620
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Didier D. Assessment of valve disease. Qualitative and quantitative. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2003; 11: 115-134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Health Canada. Congenital Anomalies in Canada – A Perinatal Health Report.  Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada; 2002 http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/cac-acc02/index-eng.php
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Marelli AJ, Mackie AS, Ionescu-Ittu R et al. Congenital heart disease in the general population: Changing prevalence and age distribution. Circulation 2007; 115: 163-172 
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Freeman LJ. Grown up congenital heart (GUCH) disease: a half century of change. Clinical medicine 2008; 8: 169-171 
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Kilner PJ, Geva T, Kaemmerer H et al. Recommendations for cardiovascular magnetic resonance in adults with congenital heart disease from the respective working groups of the European Society of Cardiology. European Heart J 2010; 3: 794-805
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Kersting-Sommerhoff BA, Diethelm L, Stanger P et al. Evaluation of complex congenital ventricular anomalies with magnetic resonance imaging. Am Heart J 1990; 120: 133-142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Hundley WG, Li HF, Lange RA et al. Assessment of left-to-right intracardiac shunting by velocity-encoded, phase-difference magnetic resonance imaging. A comparison with oximetric and indicator dilution techniques. Circulation 1995; 91: 2955-2960
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Rebergen SA, Chin JG, Ottenkamp J et al. Pulmonary regurgitation in the late postoperative follow-up of tetralogy of Fallot. Volumetric quantitation by nuclear magnetic resonance velocity mapping. Circulation 1993; 92: 1123-1132
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Sommer T, Fehske W, Holzknecht N et al. Aortic dissection: a comparative study of diagnosis with spiral CT, multiplanar transesophageal echocardiography, and MR imaging. Radiology 1996; 199: 347-352
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Fayad ZA, Nahar T, Fallon JT et al. In vivo magnetic resonance evaluation of atherosclerotic plaques in the human thoracic aorta: a comparison with transesophageal echocardiography. Circulation 2000; 101: 2503-2509
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Steffens JC, Bourne MW, Sakuma H et al. Quantification of collateral blood flow in coarctation of the aorta by velocity encoded cine magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation 1994; 90: 937-943
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Wieben O, Francois C, Reeder SB. Cardiac MRI of ischemic heart disease at 3 T: potential and challenges. Eur J Radiol 2008; 65: 15-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Oshinski JN, Delfino JG, Sharma P et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 3.0 T: current state of the art. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2010; 12: 55-68
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Schär M, Kozerke S, Fischer SE et al. Cardiac SSFP imaging at 3 Tesla. Magn Reson Med 2004; 51: 799-806
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Greiser A, Weber O, Deshpande V et al. Improved cardiac shimming in a clinical setting by multi-frame fieldmap acquisition and automatic ROI extension. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2007; 9: 239-240
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Wansapura J, Fleck R, Crotty E et al. Frequency scouting for cardiac imaging with SSFP at 3 Tesla. Pediatr Radiol 2006; 36: 1082-1085
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Michaely HJ, Nael K, Schoenberg SO et al. Analysis of cardiac function – comparison between 1.5 Tesla and 3.0 Tesla cardiac cine magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience. Invest Radiol 2006; 41: 133-140
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Hudsmith LE, Cheng AS, Tyler DJ et al. Assessment of left atrial volumes at 1.5 Tesla and 3 Tesla using FLASH and SSFP cine imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2007; 9: 673-679
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Maroules CD, McColl R, Khera A et al. Interstudy reproducibility of SSFP cine magnetic resonance: impact of magnetic field strength and parallel imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 27: 1139-1145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Cheng AS, Pegg TJ, Karamitsos TD et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging at 3-tesla for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparison with 1. 5-Tesla. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49: 2440-2449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Hamon M, Fau G, Née G et al. Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance for detection of coronary artery disease. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2010; 12: 29-39
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Levine GN, Gomes AS, Arai AE et al. American Heart Association Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization; American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology; American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention. Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiovascular devices: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention: endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation, the North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. Circulation 2007; 116: 2878-2891
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 Strach K, Naehle CP, Mühlsteffen A et al. Low field magnetic resonance imaging: increased safety for pacemaker patients?. Europace 2009; 12: 952-960
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Naehle CP, Kreuz J, Strach K et al. Safety, feasibility, and diagnostic value of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverters/defibillators at 1.5T. Am Heart J 2011; 161: 1096-1105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 90 Rouguin A, Schwitter J, Vahlhaus C et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in individuals with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Europace 2008; 10: 336-346
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 91 Sutton R, Kanal E, Wilkoff BL et al. Safety of magnetic resonance imaging of patients with a new Medtronic EnRhythm MRISureScan pacing system: clinical study design. Trials 2008; 9: 68-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Shellock FG. Reference Manual for Magnetic Resonance Safety, Implants, and Devices 2011. Los Angeles: Biomedical Research Publishing Group.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar