Browsing by Author "Jin, Hang"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Correction to: Quantification of myocardial hemorrhage using T2* cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 1.5 T with ex-vivo validation
    (Elsevier, 2022-02-07) Chen, Yinyin; Ren, Daoyuan; Guan, Xingmin; Yang, Hsin‑Jung; Liu, Ting; Tang, Richard; Ho, Hao; Jin, Hang; Zeng, Mengsu; Dharmakumar, Rohan; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    In the original publication [1] an error was introduced in the affiliations of Yinyin Chen due to a misunderstanding during the publication process. The incorrect and correct affiliations are listed below. The original article has been updated.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Quantification of myocardial hemorrhage using T2* cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 1.5T with ex-vivo validation
    (Elsevier, 2021-09-30) Chen, Yinyin; Ren, Daoyuan; Guan, Xingmin; Yang, Hsin‑Jung; Liu, Ting; Tang, Richard; Ho, Hao; Jin, Hang; Zeng, Mengsu; Dharmakumar, Rohan; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    Background: T2* cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is commonly used in the diagnosis of intramyocardial hemorrhage (IMH). For quantifying IMH with T2* CMR, despite the lack of consensus studies, two different methods [subject-specific T2* (ssT2*) and absolute T2* thresholding (aT2* < 20 ms)] are interchangeably used. We examined whether these approaches yield equivalent information. Methods: ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients (n = 70) were prospectively recruited for CMR at 4-7 days post revascularization and for 6-month follow up (n = 43). Canines studies were performed for validation purposes, where animals (n = 20) were subject to reperfused myocardial infarction (MI) and those surviving the MI (n = 16) underwent CMR at 7 days and 8 weeks and then euthanized. Both in patients and animals, T2* of IMH and volume of IMH were determined using ssT2* and aT2* < 20 ms. In animals, ex-vivo T2* CMR and mass spectrometry for iron concentration ([Fe]Hemo) were determined on excised myocardial sections. T2* values based on ssT2* and absolute T2* threshold approaches were independently regressed against [Fe]Hemo and compared. A range of T2* cut-offs were tested to determine the optimized conditions relative to ssT2*. Results: While both approaches showed many similarities, there were also differences. Compared to ssT2*, aT2* < 20 ms showed lower T2* and volume of IMH in patients and animals independent of MI age (all p < 0.005). While T2* determined from both methods were highly correlated against [Fe]Hemo (R2 = 0.9 for both), the slope of the regression curve for ssT2* was significantly larger as compared to aT2* < 20 ms (0.46 vs. 0.32, p < 0.01). Further, slightly larger absolute T2* cut-offs (patients: 23 ms; animals: 25 ms) showed similar IMH characteristics compared to ssT2*. Conclusion: Current quantification methods have excellent capacity to identify IMH, albeit the T2*of IMH and volume of IMH based on aT2* < 20 ms are smaller compared to ssT2*. Thus the method used to quantify IMH from T2* CMR may influence the diagnosis for IMH.