Elsevier

Academic Radiology

Volume 20, Issue 8, August 2013, Pages 1004-1008
Academic Radiology

Original Investigation
Mean Thoracic Aortic Wall Thickness Determination by Cine MRI with Steady-State Free Precession: Validation with Dark Blood Imaging

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2013.03.014Get rights and content

Rationale and Objectives

To assess the validity and reliability of measuring mean aortic wall thickness (MAWT) of the ascending and descending aorta using cine steady-state free precession (SSFP) imaging compared to dark blood (DB) imaging.

Materials and Methods

DB and SSFP images of the thoracic aorta acquired at 1.5 T in 50 volunteers (26 women, 24 men; mean age: 50.2 ± 13.1 years) were used. MAWT was calculated on DB and SSFP images for the ascending and descending aorta at the level of the right pulmonary artery by two independent observers. Validity was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, Passing-Bablok regression, and Spearman correlation. Reliability was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis and intraclass coefficients (ICCs).

Results

The mean MAWT of the ascending aorta on DB and SSFP images was 1.89 ± 0.21 mm and 1.87 ± 0.20 mm. The measurements for the descending aorta were 1.60 ± 0.22 and 1.63 ± 0.20 mm, respectively. Comparison of DB and SSFP measurements revealed a mean bias of 1.3% (95% limits of agreement (LOA): −7.9, 10.5%) for the ascending and of −2.1% (LOA: −10.5, 6.3%) for the descending aorta. The corresponding regression equation was y = 0.042 + 0.960 × (r = 0.91; P < .0001) and y = 0.118 + 0.939 × (r = 0.95; P < .0001), respectively. Intra- and interobserver variability showed a mean bias of less than 2.0% and LOA of less than ±15.0%. ICCs were greater than or equal to 0.85.

Conclusions

MAWT determination in the ascending and descending aorta using cine SSFP sequences is highly valid and reliable compared to DB imaging.

Section snippets

Study Population

The study was approved by the institutional review board, and written informed consent was obtained from each participant before enrollment.

This prospective study included healthy subjects without absolute or relative contraindications to MRI such as pacemaker, non–MR-compatible implants, and pregnancy. Subjects without sinus rhythm were not included in this study.

Fifty volunteers, 26 women and 24 men, with a mean age of 50.2 ± 13.1 years were enrolled in this study.

Imaging Protocol

MRI was performed in a

MAWT of Ascending and Descending Aorta

One MAWT measurement of the ascending aorta could not be performed due to poor visualization of the aortic wall in the DB sequence. Thus, 49 image datasets for the ascending and 50 datasets for the descending aorta were analyzed.

The median trigger time of the DB and SSFP sequence was 645.0 ms (IQR: 585.0–722.5 ms) and 653 ms (IQR: 587.5–721.0 ms), respectively. The difference was not statistically significant (P = .780).

The mean MAWT of the ascending aorta on DB and SSFP images was 1.89 ±

Discussion

The results of this study indicate that determination of MAWT in the ascending and descending aorta using cine SSFP sequences is valid and reliable compared to DB imaging although cine SSFP MRI has lower spatial resolution.

MRI using DB imaging is a feasible technique for the determination of aortic wall thickness with high interobserver agreement (9). The DB technique highlights the aortic wall by enhancing contrast between the hyperintense wall and the dark lumen through suppression of the

Conclusion

In conclusion, MAWT determination in the ascending and descending aorta using a cine SSFP sequence yields valid and reliable results when compared to the well-established DB imaging technique. Because cine imaging is an integral part of every cardiac MRI protocol, its use for MAWT measurement allows routine clinical determination of this important parameter.

References (14)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (25)

  • Aortic local biomechanical properties in ascending aortic aneurysms

    2022, Acta Biomaterialia
    Citation Excerpt :

    From the data presented in our paper, the thickness difference between the medial quadrant and the lateral quadrant can be as high as 16%. In general, the aortic thickness is quoted to be between 1.5 mm to 2.7 mm [29–31]. An earlier study in 1980 reported that the thickness difference between in vivo and in vitro measurements was within 20% [32].

  • Development and multi-level validation of a computational model to predict traumatic aortic injury

    2021, Computers in Biology and Medicine
    Citation Excerpt :

    To improve the biofidelity of the aortic organ for injury prediction, a number of modifications were made to the baseline model to update the material properties with more accurate constitutive models (Table 1). The aortic wall model was created to include nonlinear behavior with a single mean thickness of t = 2 mm [41,42]. The mechanical properties of the aortic wall (e.g., stress–strain response curves, failure threshold) in published studies exhibited a very large discrepancy [25,26,28–32].

  • Cardiovascular risk factors and thoracic aortic wall thickness in a general population

    2015, Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Two regions of interest were placed manually including the internal and external aortic wall of the ascending aorta. The radius of each area was calculated, assuming that all areas are circular (10,11). AWT was calculated as the difference in the radii of the external and internal aortic area (15).

  • Cardiovascular aging: Insights from local and regional measures of aortic stiffness using magnetic resonance imaging

    2014, Artery Research
    Citation Excerpt :

    In this study SBP and hypertension were also independent correlates of increased wall thickness. Good reproducibility for this measurement has been reported.5,6 However, the spatial resolution of most acquisitions (0.7–1 mm) being about half of the expected thickness for the aortic wall (1.5–2.5 mm) we believe that partial volume remains a major drawback that will require higher spatial resolution and refined automated quantification methods to be accurate.

View all citing articles on Scopus

The authors declare that they have not received any grants or funding supporting the research.

View full text