Rapid assessment of left ventricular segmental wall motion, ejection fraction, and volumes with single breath-hold, multi-slice TrueFISP MR imaging

David S. Fieno, Louise E.J. Thomson, Piotr J. Slomka, Aiden Abidov, Hidetaka Nishina, Daisy Chien, Sean W. Hayes, Rola Saouaf, Guido Germano, John D. Friedman, Daniel S. Berman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Scopus citations


Background and Objective: To reduce imaging time and complexity, we sought to determine whether single breath-hold, multi-slice TrueFISP (SB-MST) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) method is comparable to standard multi-breath-hold, multi-slice TrueFISP (MB-MST) for assessment of left ventricular (LV) wall motion abnormality (WMA), volumes, and ejection fraction (EF). Methods and Results: We studied 62 patients having cardiac MRI at 1.5-Tesla. After acquiring standard MB-MST (one slice per breath-hold), SB-MST was performed, acquiring 3 short- and 2 long-axis views over only 20 heartbeats. Using both techniques, wall motion was scored using a 6-point, 17-segment LV model for all scans (62 patients x 2 techniques/patient = 124 scans) on two separate occasions. Separately, EF and ventricular volumes were evaluated using both MB-MST and SB-MST. For all analyses, MB-MST was considered the standard against which SB-MST was compared. Twenty-six of 62 patients exhibited at least one segmental WMA by MB-MST. Exact agreement for wall motion was found in 965/1054 segments (92%, kappa = 0.74, p < 0.001), and agreement was within 1 score point in 1010/1054 segments (96%). Considering a score >1 abnormal, exact agreement for presence of WMA was found in 131/193 segments (68%) abnormal by MB-MST and for absence of WMA in 838/861 segments (97%) normal by MB-MST. Agreement within 1 score point occurred in 167/193 abnormal (87%) and in 843/861 normal segments (98%). There were no significant differences in agreement between first and second read of the data. Variability of SB-MST on read one versus read two was small (5%, 996/1054 segments read identically, p = ns) and statistically identical to variability of MB-MST on read one versus read two (4%, 1007/1054 segments read identically, p = ns). For end-diastolic volumes, end-systolic volumes, and EF using SB-MST compared to MB-MST, mean differences were 9 ± 15 ml, 6 ± 12 ml, and 2 ± 5%, and correlations were r = 0.97, 0.98 and 0.95, respectively. Conclusion: SB-MST accurately assesses wall motion, volumes and EF. This approach may serve as a screening exam for assessment of WMA and, under select circumstances, may substitute for standard multi-breath-hold method in situations requiring rapid accurate assessments of LV function.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)435-444
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Issue number3
StatePublished - 2006
Externally publishedYes


  • Cardiac Magnetic Resonance
  • Ejection Fraction
  • Left Ventricular Wall Motion
  • Rapid Imaging
  • Ventricular Volumes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'Rapid assessment of left ventricular segmental wall motion, ejection fraction, and volumes with single breath-hold, multi-slice TrueFISP MR imaging'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this