Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Published in: Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 1/2020

01-12-2020 | Position statement

Standardized image interpretation and post-processing in cardiovascular magnetic resonance - 2020 update

Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR): Board of Trustees Task Force on Standardized Post-Processing

Published in: Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

With mounting data on its accuracy and prognostic value, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is becoming an increasingly important diagnostic tool with growing utility in clinical routine. Given its versatility and wide range of quantitative parameters, however, agreement on specific standards for the interpretation and post-processing of CMR studies is required to ensure consistent quality and reproducibility of CMR reports. This document addresses this need by providing consensus recommendations developed by the Task Force for Post-Processing of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR). The aim of the Task Force is to recommend requirements and standards for image interpretation and post-processing enabling qualitative and quantitative evaluation of CMR images. Furthermore, pitfalls of CMR image analysis are discussed where appropriate. It is an update of the original recommendations published 2013.
Literature
1.
Schulz-Menger J, Bluemke DA, Bremerich J, Flamm SD, Fogel MA, Friedrich MG, et al. Standardized image interpretation and post processing in cardiovascular magnetic resonance: Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) Board of Trustees Task Force on Standardized Post Processing. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013;15:35.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
2.
Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Cummings JE, Dent JM, Hodgson JM, Hoffmann U, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HRS/NASCI/RSNA/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2008 health policy statement on structured reporting in cardiovascular imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:76–90.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Hundley WG, Bluemke D, Bogaert JG, Friedrich MG, Higgins CB, Lawson MA, et al. Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance guidelines for reporting cardiovascular magnetic resonance examinations. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2009;11:5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
4.
5.
Selvadurai BSN, Puntmann VO, Bluemke DA, Ferrari VA, Friedrich MG, Kramer CM, et al. Definition of left ventricular segments for cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11:926–8.PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2002;105:539–42.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Maceira AM, Prasad SK, Khan M, Pennell DJ. Normalized left ventricular systolic and diastolic function by steady state free precession cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2006;8:417–26.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Hudsmith LE, Petersen SE, Francis JM, Robson MD, Neubauer S. Normal human left and right ventricular and left atrial dimensions using steady state free precession magnetic resonance imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2005;7:775–82.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Natori S, Lai S, Finn JP, Gomes AS, Hundley WG, Jerosch-Herold M, et al. Cardiovascular function in multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis: normal values by age, sex, and ethnicity. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:S357–65.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Hamdan A, Kelle S, Schnackenburg B, Fleck E, Nagel E. Improved quantitative assessment of left ventricular volumes using TGrE approach after application of extracellular contrast agent at 3 Tesla. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2007;9:845–53.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Silverman D, Manning W. The complete guide to echocardiography. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett; 2012.
13.
Thiele H, Paetsch I, Schnackenburg B, Bornstedt A, Grebe O, Wellnhofer E, et al. Improved accuracy of quantitative assessment of left ventricular volume and ejection fraction by geometric models with steady-state free precession. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2002;4:327–39.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Bloomer TN, Plein S, Radjenovic A, Higgins DM, Jones TR, Ridgway JP, et al. Cine MRI using steady state free precession in the radial long axis orientation is a fast accurate method for obtaining volumetric data of the left ventricle. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;14:685–92.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Puntmann VO, Gebker R, Duckett S, Mirelis J, Schnackenburg B, Graefe M, et al. Left ventricular chamber dimensions and wall thickness by cardiovascular magnetic resonance: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;14:240–6.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Alfakih K, Plein S, Thiele H, Jones T, Ridgway JP, Sivananthan MU. Normal human left and right ventricular dimensions for MRI as assessed by turbo gradient echo and steady-state free precession imaging sequences. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;17:323–9.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Alfakih K, Plein S, Bloomer T, Jones T, Ridgway J, Sivananthan M. Comparison of right ventricular volume measurements between axial and short axis orientation using steady-state free precession magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;18:25–32.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Clarke CJ, Gurka MJ, Norton PT, Kramer CM, Hoyer AW. Assessment of the accuracy and reproducibility of RV volume measurements by CMR in congenital heart disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:28–37.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Manisty C, Ripley DP, Herrey AS, Captur G, Wong TC, Petersen SE, et al. Splenic switch-off: a tool to assess stress adequacy in adenosine perfusion cardiac MR imaging. Radiology. 2015;276:732–40.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Picard MH, Friedrich MG, Kwong RY, Stone GW, et al. Comparative definitions for moderate-severe ischemia in stress nuclear, echocardiography, and magnetic resonance imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:593–604.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Di Bella EV, Parker DL, Sinusas AJ. On the dark rim artifact in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI myocardial perfusion studies. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54:1295–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Thomson LE, Fieno DS, Abidov A, Slomka PJ, Hachamovitch R, Saouaf R, et al. Added value of rest to stress study for recognition of artifacts in perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2007;9:733–40.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Chung SY, Lee KY, Chun EJ, Lee WW, Park EK, Chang HJ, et al. Comparison of stress perfusion MRI and SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia in patients with angiographically proven three-vessel coronary artery disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:356–62.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Stanton T, Marwick TH. Assessment of subendocardial structure and function. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:867–75.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Panting JR, Gatehouse PD, Yang GZ, Grothues F, Firmin DN, Collins P, et al. Abnormal subendocardial perfusion in cardiac syndrome X detected by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1948–53.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Pilz G, Klos M, Ali E, Hoefling B, Scheck R, Bernhardt P. Angiographic correlations of patients with small vessel disease diagnosed by adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2008;10:8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
27.
Kawecka-Jaszcz K, Czarnecka D, Olszanecka A, Klecha A, Kwiecien-Sobstel A, Stolarz-Skrzypek K, et al. Myocardial perfusion in hypertensive patients with normal coronary angiograms. J Hypertens. 2008;26:1686–94.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Karamitsos TD, Ntusi NA, Francis JM, Holloway CJ, Myerson SG, Neubauer S. Feasibility and safety of high-dose adenosine perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010;12:66.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
30.
Schwitter J, DeMarco T, Kneifel S, von Schulthess GK, Jorg MC, Arheden H, et al. Magnetic resonance-based assessment of global coronary flow and flow reserve and its relation to left ventricular functional parameters: a comparison with positron emission tomography. Circulation. 2000;101:2696–702.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Kelle S, Graf K, Dreysse S, Schnackenburg B, Fleck E, Klein C. Evaluation of contrast wash-in and peak enhancement in adenosine first pass perfusion CMR in patients post bypass surgery. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010;12:28.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Taylor AJ, Al-Saadi N, Abdel-Aty H, Schulz-Menger J, Messroghli DR, Friedrich MG. Detection of acutely impaired microvascular reperfusion after infarct angioplasty with magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation. 2004;109:2080–5.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Rieber J, Huber A, Erhard I, Mueller S, Schweyer M, Koenig A, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion imaging for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease: a comparison with coronary angiography and fractional flow reserve. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:1465–71.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Nagel E, Klein C, Paetsch I, Hettwer S, Schnackenburg B, Wegscheider K, et al. Magnetic resonance perfusion measurements for the noninvasive detection of coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2003;108:432–7.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Klocke FJ, Simonetti OP, Judd RM, Kim RJ, Harris KR, Hedjbeli S, et al. Limits of detection of regional differences in vasodilated flow in viable myocardium by first-pass magnetic resonance perfusion imaging. Circulation. 2001;104:2412–6.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Mordini FE, Haddad T, Hsu LY, Kellman P, Lowrey TB, Aletras AH, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of stress perfusion CMR in comparison with quantitative coronary angiography: fully quantitative, semiquantitative, and qualitative assessment. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:14–22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Sammut EC, Villa ADM, Di Giovine G, Dancy L, Bosio F, Gibbs T, et al. Prognostic value of quantitative stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11:686–94.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
38.
Ishida M, Schuster A, Morton G, Chiribiri A, Hussain S, Paul M, et al. Development of a universal dual-bolus injection scheme for the quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2011;13:28.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Kellman P, Hansen MS, Nielles-Vallespin S, Nickander J, Themudo R, Ugander M, et al. Myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance: optimized dual sequence and reconstruction for quantification. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017;19:43.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
Jerosch-Herold M, Wilke N, Wang Y, Gong GR, Mansoor AM, Huang H, et al. Direct comparison of an intravascular and an extracellular contrast agent for quantification of myocardial perfusion. Cardiac MRI group. Int J Card Imaging. 1999;15:453–64.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Brown LAE, Onciul SC, Broadbent DA, Johnson K, Fent GJ, Foley JRJ, et al. Fully automated, inline quantification of myocardial blood flow with cardiovascular magnetic resonance: repeatability of measurements in healthy subjects. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2018;20:48.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
42.
Jerosch-Herold M, Swingen C, Seethamraju RT. Myocardial blood flow quantification with MRI by model-independent deconvolution. Med Phys. 2002;29:886–97.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Hsu LY, Jacobs M, Benovoy M, Ta AD, Conn HM, Winkler S, et al. Diagnostic performance of fully automated pixel-wise quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11:697–707.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
44.
Kim RJ, Shah DJ, Judd RM. How we perform delayed enhancement imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2003;5:505–14.PubMedCrossRef
45.
McCrohon JA, Moon JC, Prasad SK, McKenna WJ, Lorenz CH, Coats AJ, et al. Differentiation of heart failure related to dilated cardiomyopathy and coronary artery disease using gadolinium-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2003;108:54–9.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Klem I, Heitner JF, Shah DJ, Sketch MH Jr, Behar V, Weinsaft J, et al. Improved detection of coronary artery disease by stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance with the use of delayed enhancement infarction imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:1630–8.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Saremi F, Grizzard JD, Kim RJ. Optimizing cardiac MR imaging: practical remedies for artifacts. Radiographics. 2008;28:1161–87.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Kellman P, Arai AE, McVeigh ER, Aletras AH. Phase-sensitive inversion recovery for detecting myocardial infarction using gadolinium-delayed hyperenhancement. Magn Reson Med. 2002;47:372–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Weinsaft JW, Kim HW, Shah DJ, Klem I, Crowley AL, Brosnan R, et al. Detection of left ventricular thrombus by delayed-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance prevalence and markers in patients with systolic dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:148–57.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Bondarenko O, Beek AM, Hofman MB, Kuhl HP, Twisk JW, van Dockum WG, et al. Standardizing the definition of hyperenhancement in the quantitative assessment of infarct size and myocardial viability using delayed contrast-enhanced CMR. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2005;7:481–5.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Amado LC, Gerber BL, Gupta SN, Rettmann DW, Szarf G, Schock R, et al. Accurate and objective infarct sizing by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in a canine myocardial infarction model. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:2383–9.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Hsu LY, Natanzon A, Kellman P, Hirsch GA, Aletras AH, Arai AE. Quantitative myocardial infarction on delayed enhancement MRI. Part I: animal validation of an automated feature analysis and combined thresholding infarct sizing algorithm. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;23:298–308.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Flett AS, Hasleton J, Cook C, Hausenloy D, Quarta G, Ariti C, et al. Evaluation of techniques for the quantification of myocardial scar of differing etiology using cardiac magnetic resonance. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:150–6.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Klem I, Heiberg E, Van Assche L, Parker MA, Kim HW, Grizzard JD, et al. Sources of variability in quantification of cardiovascular magnetic resonance infarct size - reproducibility among three core laboratories. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017;19:62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
55.
Vermes E, Childs H, Carbone I, Barckow P, Friedrich MG. Auto-threshold quantification of late gadolinium enhancement in patients with acute heart disease. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37:382–90.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Kim HW, Farzaneh-Far A, Kim RJ. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with myocardial infarction: current and emerging applications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;55:1–16.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Schmidt A, Azevedo CF, Cheng A, Gupta SN, Bluemke DA, Foo TK, et al. Infarct tissue heterogeneity by magnetic resonance imaging identifies enhanced cardiac arrhythmia susceptibility in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation. 2007;115:2006–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
58.
Yan AT, Shayne AJ, Brown KA, Gupta SN, Chan CW, Luu TM, et al. Characterization of the peri-infarct zone by contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging is a powerful predictor of post-myocardial infarction mortality. Circulation. 2006;114:32–9.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Kim HW, Rehwald WG, Jenista ER, Wendell DC, Filev P, van Assche L, et al. Dark-blood delayed enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance of myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11:1758–69.PubMedCrossRef
60.
61.
Francis R, Kellman P, Kotecha T, Baggiano A, Norrington K, Martinez-Naharro A, et al. Prospective comparison of novel dark blood late gadolinium enhancement with conventional bright blood imaging for the detection of scar. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017;19:91.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
62.
Moon JC, Messroghli DR, Kellman P, Piechnik SK, Robson MD, Ugander M, et al. Myocardial T1 mapping and extracellular volume quantification: a Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) and CMR Working Group of the European Society of Cardiology consensus statement. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013;15:92.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
63.
Messroghli DR, Moon JC, Ferreira VM, Grosse-Wortmann L, He T, Kellman P, et al. Clinical recommendations for cardiovascular magnetic resonance mapping of T1, T2, T2* and extracellular volume: a consensus statement by the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) endorsed by the European Association for Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI). J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017;19:75.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
64.
65.
Treibel TA, Fontana M, Maestrini V, Castelletti S, Rosmini S, Simpson J, et al. Automatic measurement of the myocardial interstitium: synthetic extracellular volume quantification without hematocrit sampling. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9:54–63.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Carbone I, Childs H, Aljizeeri A, Merchant N, Friedrich MG. Importance of reference muscle selection in quantitative signal intensity analysis of T2-weighted images of myocardial edema using a T2 ratio method. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:232649.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
67.
Friedrich MG, Sechtem U, Schulz-Menger J, Holmvang G, Alakija P, Cooper LT, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in myocarditis: a JACC white paper. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1475–87.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
68.
He T, Gatehouse PD, Kirk P, Mohiaddin RH, Pennell DJ, Firmin DN. Myocardial T*2 measurement in iron-overloaded thalassemia: an ex vivo study to investigate optimal methods of quantification. Magn Reson Med. 2008;60:350–6.PubMedCrossRef
69.
He T, Gatehouse PD, Smith GC, Mohiaddin RH, Pennell DJ, Firmin DN. Myocardial T2* measurements in iron-overloaded thalassemia: an in vivo study to investigate optimal methods of quantification. Magn Reson Med. 2008;60:1082–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
70.
He T, Gatehouse PD, Kirk P, Tanner MA, Smith GC, Keegan J, et al. Black-blood T2* technique for myocardial iron measurement in thalassemia. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;25:1205–9.PubMedCrossRef
71.
Anderson LJ, Holden S, Davis B, Prescott E, Charrier CC, Bunce NH, et al. Cardiovascular T2-star (T2*) magnetic resonance for the early diagnosis of myocardial iron overload. Eur Heart J. 2001;22:2171–9.PubMedCrossRef
72.
Carpenter JP, He T, Kirk P, Roughton M, Anderson LJ, de Noronha SV, et al. On t2* magnetic resonance and cardiac iron. Circulation. 2011;123:1519–28.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
73.
Kirk P, Roughton M, Porter JB, Walker JM, Tanner MA, Patel J, et al. Cardiac T2* magnetic resonance for prediction of cardiac complications in thalassemia major. Circulation. 2009;120:1961–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
74.
Dyverfeldt P, Bissell M, Barker AJ, Bolger AF, Carlhall CJ, Ebbers T, et al. 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2015;17:72.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
75.
Mohiaddin RH, Kilner PJ, Rees S, Longmore DB. Magnetic resonance volume flow and jet velocity mapping in aortic coarctation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1515–21.PubMedCrossRef
76.
Mohiaddin RH, Pennell DJ. MR blood flow measurement. Clinical application in the heart and circulation. Cardiol Clin. 1998;16:161–87.PubMedCrossRef
77.
Rebergen SA, van der Wall EE, Doornbos J, de Roos A. Magnetic resonance measurement of velocity and flow: technique, validation, and cardiovascular applications. Am Heart J. 1993;126:1439–56.PubMedCrossRef
78.
Lotz J, Meier C, Leppert A, Galanski M. Cardiovascular flow measurement with phase-contrast MR imaging: basic facts and implementation. Radiographics. 2002;22:651–71.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Iwamoto Y, Inage A, Tomlinson G, Lee KJ, Grosse-Wortmann L, Seed M, et al. Direct measurement of aortic regurgitation with phase-contrast magnetic resonance is inaccurate: proposal of an alternative method of quantification. Pediatr Radiol. 2014;44:1358–69.PubMedCrossRef
80.
Richau J, Dieringer MA, Traber J, von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff F, Greiser A, Schwenke C, et al. Effects of heart valve prostheses on phase contrast flow measurements in cardiovascular magnetic resonance - a phantom study. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2017;19:5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
81.
Gatehouse PD, Rolf MP, Graves MJ, Hofman MB, Totman J, Werner B, et al. Flow measurement by cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a multi-centre multi-vendor study of background phase offset errors that can compromise the accuracy of derived regurgitant or shunt flow measurements. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010;12:5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
82.
Kawel-Boehm N, Maceira A, Valsangiacomo-Buechel ER, Vogel-Claussen J, Turkbey EB, Williams R, et al. Normal values for cardiovascular magnetic resonance in adults and children. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2015;17:29.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
83.
84.
Burman ED, Keegan J, Kilner PJ. Pulmonary artery diameters, cross sectional areas and area changes measured by cine cardiovascular magnetic resonance in healthy volunteers. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2016;18:12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
85.
Seller N, Yoo SJ, Grant B, Grosse-Wortmann L. How many versus how much: comprehensive haemodynamic evaluation of partial anomalous pulmonary venous connection by cardiac MRI. Eur Radiol. 2018;28:4598–606.PubMedCrossRef
86.
Angelini P, Cheong BY, Lenge De Rosen VV, Lopez A, Uribe C, Masso AH, et al. High-risk cardiovascular conditions in sports-related sudden death: prevalence in 5,169 schoolchildren screened via cardiac magnetic resonance. Tex Heart Inst J. 2018;45:205–13.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
87.
Hiratzka LF, Bakris GL, Beckman JA, Bersin RM, Carr VF, Casey DE Jr, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American College of Radiology, American Stroke Association, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and Society for Vascular Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:e27–e129.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Standardized image interpretation and post-processing in cardiovascular magnetic resonance - 2020 update
Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR): Board of Trustees Task Force on Standardized Post-Processing
Publication date
01-12-2020
Published in
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1532-429X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-020-00610-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research

Quantitative evaluation of carotid atherosclerotic vulnerable plaques using in vivo T1 mapping cardiovascular magnetic resonaonce: validation by histology

Research

Co-existing cerebrovascular atherosclerosis predicts subsequent vascular event: a multi-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging study

Research

Feasibility of contrast-enhanced coronary artery magnetic resonance angiography using compressed sensing

Research

Clinical validation of three cardiovascular magnetic resonance techniques to measure strain and torsion in patients with suspected coronary artery disease

Research

Normal right and left ventricular volumes prospectively obtained from cardiovascular magnetic resonance in awake, healthy, 0- 12 year old children

Research

Clinical utility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators presenting with electrical instability or worsening heart failure symptoms