Verónica Aramendía-Vidaurreta1,2, Pedro M. Gordaliza3,4, Marta Vidorreta5, Rebeca Echeverría-Chasco1,2, Gorka Bastarrika1,2, Arrate Muñoz-Barrutia3,4, and María A. Fernández-Seara1,2
1Radiology, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain, 2IdiSNA, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain, 3Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Madrid, Spain, 4Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain, 5Siemens Healthineers, Madrid, Spain
1Radiology, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain, 2IdiSNA, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain, 3Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Madrid, Spain, 4Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain, 5Siemens Healthineers, Madrid, Spain
Results indicate the
superiority of acquiring myocardial ASL images using a free-breathing strategy combined
with pairwise registration, showing higher accuracy (in synthetic images) and
higher reproducibility together with lower variability across subjects (in in
vivo images).
Figure 4: Bland-Altman plots and
within-subject coefficient of variation (wsCV) obtained from the global
myocardial perfusion measurements in the in vivo datasets
Figure 3: Boxplots of MBF measurements in vivo averaged across the two intrasession
acquisitions for the different breathing strategies (BH=breathhold,
SB=synchronized breathing and FB=free breathing) and post-processing steps (O=Original dataset, P= after pairwise registration,
G= after groupwise registration, DD = after detecting and discarding outliers).
*Indicates statistically significant differences between datasets (p=0.05).
