Contrast-free postoperative imaging of the pulmonary artery vasculature: Comparison of Relaxation-Enhanced Angiography without Contrast and Triggering (REACT) and time-resolved contrast-enhanced MRA
Author Block: V. Schmidt, L. Goertz, J. Tristram, R. A. Terzis, K. Kaya, D. Maintz, C. H. Gietzen, L. Pennig, J. P. Janssen; Köln/DE
Purpose: To compare REACT, a flow-independent 3D isotropic non-contrast MRA, with time-resolved contrast-enhanced MRA (4D CE-MRA) for postoperative assessment of the pulmonary arteries and right ventricular outflow tract, with emphasis on different implant types.
Methods or Background: In this retrospective single-center study, 53 patients with congenital heart disease underwent both 4D CE-MRA and REACT at 1.5 T. Three radiologists independently scored image quality (IQ), motion, and susceptibility on 5-point Likert scales for MPA, LPA, and RPA; diameters were measured and stenosis/dilatation recorded. Subgroup analyses were performed for stents, conduit/patch/valve (CPV), and no implant.
Results or Findings: REACT achieved higher overall IQ than 4D CE-MRA and significantly better motion scores in all vessels (all p < 0.001), while susceptibility scores were comparable (ns). The proportion of fully diagnostic studies (3/3 segments) was similar (REACT 77.4%, 41/53; 4D CE-MRA 83.0%, 44/53; McNemar ns). Diameter measurements showed excellent inter-reader agreement (ICC ≈ 0.89–0.95) and minimal bias between techniques; only the RPA was slightly smaller with REACT (mean difference –0.85 mm, p < 0.001), with Bland-Altman limits around ± 4 mm. In subgroup analyses, stented segments exhibited no IQ advantage of REACT and remained limited by susceptibility; motion scores remained superior with REACT, and diagnostic yield differences were not significant. In CPV and no-implant groups, REACT provided about +1 median IQ and motion score, with high diagnostic rates for both techniques.
Conclusion: REACT enables robust, contrast-free postoperative imaging of the pulmonary arteries with superior image quality and reduced motion artifacts compared to 4D CE-MRA, while maintaining highly reproducible diameter measurements. Stent segments remain a shared limitation; neither technique reliably evaluates stent lumen, and alternative modalities should be considered for targeted stent assessment.
Limitations: Non
Funding for this study: Non
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Yes
Ethics committee - additional information: The local ethics committee approved this study.