Motion-compensated T1 mapping in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: a technical review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="IM1"><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math> mapping is becoming a staple magnetic resonance imaging method for diagnosing myocardial diseases such as ischemic cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, myocarditis, and more. Clinically, most <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="IM2"><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math> mapping sequences acquire a single slice at a single cardiac phase across a 10 to 15-heartbeat breath-hold, with one to three slices acquired in total. This leaves opportunities for improving patient comfort and information density by acquiring data across multiple cardiac phases in free-running acquisitions and across multiple respiratory phases in free-breathing acquisitions. Scanning in the presence of cardiac and respiratory motion requires more complex motion characterization and compensation. Most clinical mapping sequences use 2D single-slice acquisitions; however newer techniques allow for motion-compensated reconstructions in three dimensions and beyond. To further address confounding factors and improve measurement accuracy, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="IM3"><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math> maps can be acquired jointly with other quantitative parameters such as <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="IM4"><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math> , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="IM5"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:math> , fat fraction, and more. These multiparametric acquisitions allow for constrained reconstruction approaches that isolate contributions to <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="IM6"><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math> from other motion and relaxation mechanisms. In this review, we examine the state of the literature in motion-corrected and motion-resolved <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="IM7"><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math> mapping, with potential future directions for further technical development and clinical translation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".