Diagnostic Role of Native T1 Mapping Compared to Conventional Magnetic Resonance Techniques in Cardiac Disease in a Real-Life Cohort

We sought to compare native T1 mapping to conventional late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and T2-STIR techniques in a cohort of consecutive patients undergoing cardiac MRI (CMR). CMR was performed in 323 patients, 206 males (64%), mean age 54 & PLUSMN; 8 years, and in 27 age- and sex- matched healthy controls. In T2-STIR images, myocardial hyperintensity suggesting edema was found in 41 patients (27%). LGE images were positive in 206 patients (64%). T1 mapping was abnormal in 171 (49%). In 206 patients (64%), a matching between LGE and native T1 was found. T1 was abnormal in 32 out of 41 (78%) with edema in T2-STIR images. Overall, LGE and/or T2-STIR were abnormal in 209 patients, whereas native T1 was abnormal in 154 (52%). Conventional techniques and T1 mapping were concordant in 208 patients (64%). In 39 patients, T1 mapping was positive despite negative conventional techniques (12%). T1 mapping was able in conditions with diffuse myocardial damage such as cardiac amyloidosis, scleroderma, and Fabry disease (additive role in 42%). In contrast, T1 mapping was less effective in cardiac disease with regional distribution of myocardial damage such as myocardial infarction, HCM, and myocarditis. In conclusion, conventional LGE/T2-STIR and T1 mapping are complementary techniques and should be used together in every CMR examination.

Automated summary

In a cohort of consecutive patients undergoing cardiac MRI, we compared native T1 mapping to conventional late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and T2-STIR techniques. The results showed that conventional techniques and T1 mapping were concordant in most patients, but in a few patients, T1 mapping was positive while conventional techniques were negative. Overall, conventional LGE/T2-STIR and T1 mapping are complementary techniques and should be used together in every CMR examination.