Society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance recommendations for training and competency of CMR technologists.

The Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) recommendations for training and competency of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) technologists document will define the knowledge, experiences and skills required for a technologist to be competent in CMR imaging. By providing a framework for CMR training and competency the overarching goal is to promote the performance of high-quality CMR and to foster the increased adoption of CMR into clinical care.

Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) guidance for the practice of cardiovascular magnetic resonance during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The aim of this document is to provide general guidance and specific recommendations on the practice of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are two major considerations. First, continued urgent and semi-urgent care for the patients who have no known active COVID-19 should be provided in a safe manner for both patients and staff. Second, when necessary, CMR on patients with confirmed or suspected active COVID-19 should focus on the specific clinical question with an emphasis on myocardial function and tissue characterization while optimizing patient and staff safety.

Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) guidance for re-activation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance practice after peak phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.

During the peak phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, alterations of standard operating procedures were necessary for health systems to protect patients and healthcare workers and ensure access to vital hospital resources. As the peak phase passes, re-activation plans are required to safely manage increasing clinical volumes. In the context of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), re-activation objectives include continued performance of urgent CMR studies and resumption of CMR in patients with semi-urgent and elective indications in an environment that is safe for both patients and health care workers.

T1 mapping performance and measurement repeatability: results from the multi-national T1 mapping standardization phantom program (T1MES).

BACKGROUND: The T1 Mapping and Extracellular volume (ECV) Standardization (T1MES) program explored T1 mapping quality assurance using a purpose-developed phantom with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Conformité Européenne (CE) regulatory clearance. We report T1 measurement repeatability across centers describing sequence, magnet, and vendor performance. METHODS: Phantoms batch-manufactured in August 2015 underwent 2 years of structural imaging, B0 and B1, and "reference" slow T1 testing. Temperature dependency was evaluated by the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology and by the German Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt. Center-specific T1 mapping repeatability (maximum one scan per week to minimum one per quarter year) was assessed over mean 358 (maximum 1161) days on 34 1.5 T and 22 3 T magnets using multiple T1 mapping sequences. Image and temperature data were analyzed semi-automatically. Repeatability of serial T1 was evaluated in terms of coefficient of variation (CoV), and linear mixed models were constructed to study the interplay of some of the known sources of T1 variation. RESULTS: Over 2 years, phantom gel integrity remained intact (no rips/tears), B0 and B1 homogenous, and "reference" T1 stable compared to baseline (% change at 1.5 T, 1.95 ± 1.39%; 3 T, 2.22 ± 1.44%). Per degrees Celsius, 1.5 T, T1 (MOLLI 5s(3s)3s) increased by 11.4 ms in long native blood tubes and decreased by 1.2 ms in short post-contrast myocardium tubes. Agreement of estimated T1 times with "reference" T1 was similar across Siemens and Philips CMR systems at both field strengths (adjusted R2 ranges for both field strengths, 0.99-1.00). Over 1 year, many 1.5 T and 3 T sequences/magnets were repeatable with mean CoVs < 1 and 2% respectively. Repeatability was narrower for 1.5 T over 3 T. Within T1MES repeatability for native T1 was narrow for several sequences, for example, at 1.5 T, Siemens MOLLI 5s(3s)3s prototype number 448B (mean CoV = 0.27%) and Philips modified Look-Locker inversion recovery (MOLLI) 3s(3s)5s (CoV 0.54%), and at 3 T, Philips MOLLI 3b(3s)5b (CoV 0.33%) and Siemens shortened MOLLI (ShMOLLI) prototype 780C (CoV 0.69%). After adjusting for temperature and field strength, it was found that the T1 mapping sequence and scanner software version (both P < 0.001 at 1.5 T and 3 T), and to a lesser extent the scanner model (P = 0.011, 1.5 T only), had the greatest influence on T1 across multiple centers. CONCLUSION: The T1MES CE/FDA approved phantom is a robust quality assurance device. In a multi-center setting, T1 mapping had performance differences between field strengths, sequences, scanner software versions, and manufacturers. However, several specific combinations of field strength, sequence, and scanner are highly repeatable, and thus, have potential to provide standardized assessment of T1 times for clinical use, although temperature correction is required for native T1 tubes at least.

Microvascular dysfunction determines infarct characteristics in patients with reperfused ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: The MICROcirculation in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MICRO-AMI) study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with reperfused ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) both invasive and non-invasive assessments of microvascular dysfunction, the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR), and microvascular obstruction (MVO) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), independently predict poor long-term outcomes. AIMS: The aims of this study were to investigate whether an invasive parameter (IMR), assessed at the time of primary percutaneous intervention (PPCI), could predict the extent of MVO in proportion to infarct size (MVO index). METHODS: 50 patients presenting with STEMI and TIMI flow ≤ I in the infarct related artery were prospectively recruited to the study, before undergoing PPCI. All patients underwent invasive IMR assessment at maximal hyperaemia using adenosine, and following stent insertion. CMR was performed on day 2 following STEMI, MVO was assessed both on first-pass rest perfusion (early MVO) and in the late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) images (late MVO) along with infarct size. The MVO index was calculated as the ratio of late MVO/infarct size. Differences between IMR quartiles and the MVO index were investigated. RESULTS: The median IMR was 38.5 (range 9 to 202). The median size of late MVO was 1.9% LV (range 0 to 21.0% LV). IMR predicted late MVO (p<0.01) and as IMR increased, the MVO index increased (r = 0.70, [95% CI 0.53, 0.82], p<0.001). An IMR cut-off of 40 significantly predicted the presence of late MVO on CMR (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: IMR measured at the time of PPCI in acutely reperfused STEMI is associated with the presence and severity of infarct damage as measured by the MVO index. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Microcirculation in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MICRO-AMI). Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01552564. Registered 9th March 2012.

Quantification of infarct size and myocardium at risk: evaluation of different techniques and its implications.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate seven methods for quantifying myocardial oedema [2 standard deviation (SD), 3 SD, 5 SD, full width at half maximum (FWHM), Otsu method, manual thresholding, and manual contouring] from T2-weighted short tau inversion recovery (T2w STIR) and also to reassess these same seven methods for quantifying acute infarct size following ST-segment myocardial infarction (STEMI). This study focuses on test-retest repeatability while assessing inter- and intraobserver variability. T2w STIR and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) are the most widely used cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) techniques to image oedema and infarction, respectively. However, no consensus exists on the best quantification method to be used to analyse these images. This has potential important implications in the research setting where both myocardial oedema and infarct size are increasingly used and measured as surrogate endpoints in clinical trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty patients day 2 following acute reperfused STEMI were scanned for myocardial oedema and infarction (LGE). All patients had a second CMR scan on the same day >6 h apart from the first one. Images were analysed offline by two independent observers using the semi-automated software. Both oedema and LGE were quantified using seven techniques (2 SD, 3 SD, 5 SD, Otsu, FWHM, manual threshold, and manual contouring). Interobserver, intraobserver and test-retest agreement and variability for both infarct size and oedema quantification were assessed. Infarct size and myocardial quantification vary depending on the quantification method used. Overall, manual contouring provided the lowest inter-, intraobserver, and interscan variability for both infarct size and oedema quantification. The FWHM method for infarct size quantification and the Otsu method for myocardial oedema quantification are acceptable alternatives. CONCLUSIONS: This study determines that, in acute myocardial infarction (MI), manual contouring has the lowest overall variability for quantification of both myocardial oedema and MI when analysed by experienced observers.