| Title |
SASHA versus ShMOLLI: a comparison of T1 mapping methods in health and dilated cardiomyopathy at 3 T
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10554-017-1134-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Benedict T. Costello, Fabian Springer, James L. Hare, Andre La Gerche, Leah Iles, Andris H. Ellims, Benjamin Schmitt, Andrew J. Taylor |
| Abstract |
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance derived T1 mapping parameters are a non-invasive method of estimating diffuse myocardial fibrosis. This study aims to to determine the native T1 time, post contrast T1 time and extracellular volume (ECV) derived from T1 mapping and to evaluate the ability of T1 mapping techniques to discriminate healthy myocardium from dilated cardiomyopathy. Seventy-nine participants underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at the Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia. Fifty-seven healthy volunteers and twenty-two patients with Dilated cardiomyopathy were included in the study. Each participant had T1 mapping sequences performed at 3 T in the mid short axis slice-both SASHA and ShMOLLI T1 mapping were performed. Native T1, post contrast T1 and ECV values were compared in health and dilated cardiomyopathy. Native T1, post contrast T1 and ECV differed significantly between SASHA and ShMOLLI techniques (P < 0.001). All T1 parameters had similar ability to discriminate normal from abnormal myocardium (ROC AUC 0.691 to 0.830). Converting T1 values to Z scores significantly improved the agreement between SASHA and ShMOLLI techniques, particularly for post contrast T1 (ICC 0.19 to 0.895) and ECV (ICC 0.461 to 0.880). T1 mapping values from SASHA and ShMOLLI show strong correlation for post contrast measures, though with a consistent offset for all measures in health and dilated cardiomyopathy. All measures obtained using SASHA and ShMOLLI allow good discrimination between dilated cardiomyopathy and normal myocardium. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 33% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 17% |
| Librarian | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 33% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 8% |
| Engineering | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#938
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,482
of 331,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#33
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 331,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.