General Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Part of the Contemporary Cardiology book series (CONCARD)
  1. 1.
    Anatomic and functional cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) requires:
    1. A.

      Ability to perform long breath-holds (>15 s)

    2. B.

      Weight <100 kg (220 lbs)

    3. C.

      Sinus rhythm

    4. D.

      Absence of coronary stents

    5. E.

      Claustrophobia management


    Correct answer is E.

    CMR imaging no longer requires prolonged breath holding [1]. Patients of up to 230 kg (400 lb) may be imaged, although image quality may be suboptimal in the morbidly obese [2]. The presence of regular sinus rhythm is desirable for cardiac imaging but not mandatory. Stents cause local image artifacts but are not contraindication for CMR [3, 4, 5]. Claustrophobia management is essential before CMR is attempted.

  2. 2.
    In comparing CMR with other noninvasive imaging modalities, which of the following statements is correct?
    1. A.

      The exposure to ionizing radiation with CMR is more than with a single chest X-ray, but considerably less than that of a chest computed tomography (CT) scan

    2. B.

      The exposure to ionizing radiation with CMR...


Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Pulmonary Vein Right Ventricle Left Pulmonary Artery Left Atrial Appendage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    1. Danilouchkine MG, Westenberg JJ, Lelieveldt BP, and Reiber JH. Accuracy of short-axis cardiac MRI automatically derived from scout acquisitions in free-breathing and breath-holding modes. Magma, 2005;18(1):7–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    2. Danias PG, Tritos NA, Stuber M, Kissinger KV, Salton CJ, and Manning WJ. Cardiac structure and function in the obese: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging study. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson, 2003;5(3):431–438.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    3. Gerber TC, Fasseas P, Lennon RJ, et al. Clinical safety of magnetic resonance imaging early after coronary artery stent placement. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2003;42(7):1295–1298.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    4. Schroeder AP, Houlind K, Pedersen EM, Thuesen L, Nielsen TT, and Egeblad H. Magnetic resonance imaging seems safe in patients with intracoronary stents. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson, 2000;2(1):43–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    5. Strohm O, Kivelitz D, Gross W, et al. Safety of implantable coronary stents during 1H-magnetic resonance imaging at 1.0 and 1.5 T. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson, 1999;1(3):239–245.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    6. Alfakih K, Reid S, Jones T, and Sivananthan M. Assessment of ventricular function and mass by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol, 2004;14(10):1813–1822.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    7. Marcu CB, Beek AM, and Van Rossum AC. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of right heart involvement in cardiac and pulmonary disease. Heart Lung Circ, 2006;15(6):362–370.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    8. Myerson SG, Bellenger NG, and Pennell DJ. Assessment of left ventricular mass by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Hypertension, 2002;39(3):750–755.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    9. Pujadas S, Reddy GP, Weber O, Lee JJ, and Higgins CB. MR imaging assessment of cardiac function. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2004;19(6):789–799.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    10. Berman DS, Hachamovitch R, Shaw LJ, et al. Roles of nuclear cardiology, cardiac computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance: assessment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med, 2006;47(1):74–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    11. Manning WJ, Nezafat R, Appelbaum E, Danias PG, Hauser TH, and Yeon SB. Coronary Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Cardiol Clin, 2007;25(1):141–170.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    12. Hoffmann U, Ferencik M, Cury RC, and Pena AJ. Coronary CT angiography. J Nucl Med, 2006;47(5):797–806.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    13. Carerj S, Micari A, Trono A, et al. Anatomical M-mode: an old-new technique. Echocardiography, 2003;20(4):357–361.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    14. Sondergaard L, Hildebrandt P, Lindvig K, et al. Valve area and cardiac output in aortic stenosis: quantification by magnetic resonance velocity mapping. Am Heart J, 1993;126(5):1156–1164.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    15. Chatzimavroudis GP, Oshinski JN, Franch RH, Walker PG, Yoganathan AP, and Pettigrew RI. Evaluation of the precision of magnetic resonance phase velocity mapping for blood flow measurements. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson, 2001;3(1):11–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    16. Gelfand EV, Hughes S, Hauser TH, et al. Severity of mitral and aortic regurgitation as assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance: optimizing correlation with Doppler echocardiography. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson, 2006;8(3):503–507.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    17. Ley S, Eichhorn J, Ley-Zaporozhan J, et al. Evaluation of aortic regurgitation in congenital heart disease: value of MR imaging in comparison to echocardiography. Pediatr Radiol, 2007;37(5):426–436.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    18. Marcu CB, Beek AM, and van Rossum AC. Clinical applications of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. Cmaj, 2006;175(8):911–917.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    19. Danias PG, Stuber M, McConnell MV, and Manning WJ. The diagnosis of congenital coronary anomalies with magnetic resonance imaging. Coron Artery Dis, 2001;12(8):621–626.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    20. Varghese A, Keegan J, and Pennell DJ. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance of anomalous coronary arteries. Coron Artery Dis, 2005;16(6):355–364.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    21. Isbell DC and Kramer CM. Magnetic resonance for the assessment of myocardial viability. Curr Opin Cardiol, 2006;21(5):469–472.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    22. Kim DH, Choi SI, Chang HJ, Choi DJ, Lim C, and Park JH. Delayed hyperenhancement by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: Clinical application for various cardiac diseases. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2006;30(2):226–232.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    23. Vogel-Claussen J, Rochitte CE, Wu KC, et al. Delayed enhancement MR imaging: utility in myocardial assessment. Radiographics, 2006;26(3):795–810.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    24. Greenfield JC, Jr., Harley A, Thompson HK, and Wallace AG. Pressure-flow studies in man during atrial fibrillation. J Clin Invest, 1968;47(10):2411–2421.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    25. Hundley WG, Meshack BM, Willett DL, et al. Comparison of quantitation of left ventricular volume, ejection fraction, and cardiac output in patients with atrial fibrillation by cine magnetic resonance imaging versus invasive measurements. Am J Cardiol, 1996;78(10):1119–1123.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    26. Wyttenbach R, Bremerich J, Saeed M, and Higgins CB. Integrated MR imaging approach to valvular heart disease. Cardiol Clin, 1998;16(2):277–294.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    27. Didier D, Saint-Martin C, Lapierre C, et al. Coarctation of the aorta: pre and postoperative evaluation with MRI and MR angiography; correlation with echocardiography and surgery. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging, 2006;22(3–4):457–475.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    28. Riehle TJ, Oshinski JN, Brummer ME, et al. Velocity-encoded magnetic resonance image assessment of regional aortic flow in coarctation patients. Ann Thorac Surg, 2006;81(3):1002–1007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press, a part of Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008

Personalised recommendations