Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc. 2020 Nov 6;122:11–22. doi: 10.1016/j.pnmrs.2020.10.001

Table 1.

Comparison of conventional cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) tissue characterization and cardiac MR Fingerprinting (cMRF).

Technique considerations Conventional CMR Tissue Characterization Cardiac MR Fingerprinting (cMRF)
Physiology ECG-gated, breath-held ECG-gated, breath-held
Gradient trajectory Cartesian acquisition Non-Cartesian (Spiral, Radial, Rosette) or Cartesian
Kspace sampling per image frame Fully-sampled or mildly undersampled Highly undersampled
Number of image frames Up to 15 (e.g. 1 per heartbeat) Hundreds (e.g. 48 per heartbeat)
Tissue properties mapped One per acquisition (e.g. T1 or T2) Multiple per acquisition (e.g. T1, T2, and M0)
Magnetization preparation Inversion pulse or T2preparation pulse Inversion pulse and T2preparation pulse
Signal model Exponential decay or recovery Bloch equation magnetization vector
Quantification method Curve fitting Pattern matching to dictionary