↓ Skip to main content

A review of 3D first-pass, whole-heart, myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A review of 3D first-pass, whole-heart, myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12968-015-0162-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Merlin J. Fair, Peter D. Gatehouse, Edward V. R. DiBella, David N. Firmin

Abstract

A comprehensive review is undertaken of the methods available for 3D whole-heart first-pass perfusion (FPP) and their application to date, with particular focus on possible acceleration techniques. Following a summary of the parameters typically desired of 3D FPP methods, the review explains the mechanisms of key acceleration techniques and their potential use in FPP for attaining 3D acquisitions. The mechanisms include rapid sequences, non-Cartesian k-space trajectories, reduced k-space acquisitions, parallel imaging reconstructions and compressed sensing. An attempt is made to explain, rather than simply state, the varying methods with the hope that it will give an appreciation of the different components making up a 3D FPP protocol. Basic estimates demonstrating the required total acceleration factors in typical 3D FPP cases are included, providing context for the extent that each acceleration method can contribute to the required imaging speed, as well as potential limitations in present 3D FPP literature. Although many 3D FPP methods are too early in development for the type of clinical trials required to show any clear benefit over current 2D FPP methods, the review includes the small but growing quantity of clinical research work already using 3D FPP, alongside the more technical work. Broader challenges concerning FPP such as quantitative analysis are not covered, but challenges with particular impact on 3D FPP methods, particularly with regards to motion effects, are discussed along with anticipated future work in the field.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 75 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 30%
Researcher 13 16%
Other 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 13 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 33%
Engineering 19 24%
Physics and Astronomy 6 8%
Computer Science 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 13 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 August 2015.
All research outputs
#6,592,588
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#466
of 1,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,997
of 276,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#16
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 276,760 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.