Abstract
Purpose To assess the performance of gradient-spin echo (GraSE) based STIR (GraSE-STIR) sequence in CMR imaging compared to turbo spin echo based conventional STIR for myocardial visualization.
Methods In a prospective study, we examined forty-four normal volunteers and seventeen patients referred for CMR imaging using a conventional STIR and GraSE-STIR techniques. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), image quality, T2 signal intensity (SI) ratio, specific absorption rate (SAR), and image acquisition time were compared between both sequences.
Results GraSE-STIR showed significant improvements in image quality (4.15 ± 0.8 vs. 3.34 ± 0.9, P = 0.024) and cardiac motion artifact reduction (7 vs. 18 out of 53, p = 0.038) compared to conventional STIR. Furthermore, the acquisition time (27.17 ± 3.53 vs. 36.9 ± 4.08 seconds, p = 0.041) and the local torso SAR (< % 13 vs. < % 17, p = 0.047) were significantly lower for GraSE-STIR compared to conventional STIR in short axis plan. However, no significant differences were shown in T2 SI ratio (p = 0.141), SNR (p = 0.093), CNR (P = 0.068), and SAR (p = 0.071) between these two sequences.
Conclusions GraSE-STIR offers notable advantages over conventional STIR sequence, with improved image quality, reduced motion artifacts, and shorter acquisition times. These findings highlight the potential of GraSE-STIR as a valuable technique for routine clinical CMR imaging.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the local ethics committee at Tehran University of Medical Sciences under the reference number IR.TUMS.SPH.REC.1402.045.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data referred to in the manuscript are available upon request from the corresponding author.
