Introduction
CMR technique | Pros | Cons |
---|---|---|
Early gadolinium enhancement (EGE) | Hyperemia | Image quality/artifacts Scarce validation against histology Mechanism unclear |
T2-weighted images | Edema, free water | Image quality/artifacts Scarce validation against histology No prognostic data |
Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) | Scar/necrosis Best validation against histology Widely available/usually good quality Prognostic impact | Indicating irreversible damage but not specific for inflammation Only focal processes Correct inversion time important |
T1 mapping native | Diffuse fibrosis Edema, free water No contrast agent Short acquisition protocol | Not clinical routine Variety of sequences Different normal ranges High T1 not specific |
Extracellular volume (ECV) quantification | Expansion of extracellular space: edema, fibrosis, amyloid deposition | Not clinical routine Motion artifacts |
T2 mapping | Edema, free water No contrast agent Short acquisition protocol | Not clinical routine Interindividual variability |
PET/MR | Combining detection of inflammation (PET) with high-resolution tissue characterizing (MR) | Expensive Not widely available Radiation exposure |