The DOI matches its Crossref record.
An Improved MR Imaging Technique for the Visualization of Myocardial Infarction
Abstract
PURPOSE: To design a segmented inversion-recovery turbo fast low-angle shot (turboFLASH) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging pulse sequence for the visualization of myocardial infarction, compare this technique with other MR imaging approaches in a canine model of ischemic injury, and evaluate its utility in patients with coronary artery disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six dogs and 18 patients were examined. In dogs, infarction was produced and images were acquired by using 10 different pulse sequences. In patients, the segmented turboFLASH technique was used to acquire contrast material-enhanced images 19 days +/- 7 (SD) after myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Myocardial regions of increased signal intensity were observed in all animals and patients at imaging. With the postcontrast segmented turboFLASH sequence, the signal intensity of the infarcted myocardium was 1,080% +/- 214 higher than that of the normal myocardium in dogs-nearly twice that of the next best sequence tested and approximately 10-fold greater than that in previous reports. All 18 patients with myocardial infarction demonstrated high signal intensity at imaging. On average, the signal intensity of the high-signal-intensity regions in patients was 485% +/- 43 higher than that of the normal myocardium. CONCLUSION: The segmented inversion-recovery turboFLASH sequence produced the greatest differences in regional myocardial signal intensity in animals. Application of this technique in patients with infarction substantially improved differentiation between injured and normal regions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Kindermann, I., Barth, C., Mahfoud, F., Ukena, C., Lenski, M., Yilmaz, A., Klingel, K., Kandolf, R., Sechtem, U., Cooper, L. T., et al. (2012) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.09.074 · Cited by 919
Clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR): Consensus Panel report?
PENNELL, D. (2004) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1016/j.ehj.2004.06.040 · Cited by 747
Azevedo, C. F., Nigri, M., Higuchi, M. L., Pomerantzeff, P. M., Spina, G. S., Sampaio, R. O., Tarasoutchi, F., Grinberg, M., & Rochitte, C. E. (2010) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.12.074 · Cited by 548
Amado, L. C., Gerber, B. L., Gupta, S. N., Rettmann, D. W., Szarf, G., Schock, R., Nasir, K., Kraitchman, D. L., & Lima, J. A. C. (2004) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2004.09.020 · Cited by 508
Fung, G., Luo, H., Qiu, Y., Yang, D., & McManus, B. (2016) · Circulation Research · doi:10.1161/circresaha.115.306573 · Cited by 444
Metadata
- Authors
- Simonetti, O. P., Kim, R. J., Fieno, D. S., Hillenbrand, H. B., Wu, E., Bundy, J. M., Finn, J. P., & Judd, R. M.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2001-01
- Volume
- 218
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 215-223
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2171700197
- Cited by
- 1,358
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 42.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Improved MR Imaging Technique for the Visualization of Myocardial Infarction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiology.218.1.r01ja50215
- The paper
- Simonetti, O. P., Kim, R. J., Fieno, D. S., Hillenbrand, H. B., Wu, E., Bundy, J. M., Finn, J. P., & Judd, R. M. (2001). An Improved MR Imaging Technique for the Visualization of Myocardial Infarction. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.218.1.r01ja50215
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
