Artificial Intelligence Enabled Fully Automated CMR Function Quantification for Optimized Risk Stratification in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.
Journal
Journal of interventional cardiology
ISSN: 1540-8183
Titre abrégé: J Interv Cardiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8907826
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
15
10
2021
revised:
20
12
2021
accepted:
21
03
2022
entrez:
11
5
2022
pubmed:
12
5
2022
medline:
14
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging is considered the reference standard for assessing cardiac morphology and function and has demonstrated prognostic utility in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Novel fully automated analyses may facilitate data analyses but have not yet been compared against conventional manual data acquisition in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Fully automated and manual biventricular assessments were performed in 139 AS patients scheduled for TAVR using commercially available software (suiteHEART®, Neosoft; QMass®, Medis Medical Imaging Systems). Volumetric assessment included left ventricular (LV) mass, LV/right ventricular (RV) end-diastolic/end-systolic volume, LV/RV stroke volume, and LV/RV ejection fraction (EF). Results of fully automated and manual analyses were compared. Regression analyses and receiver operator characteristics including area under the curve (AUC) calculation for prediction of the primary study endpoint cardiovascular (CV) death were performed. Fully automated and manual assessment of LVEF revealed similar prediction of CV mortality in univariable (manual: hazard ratio (HR) 0.970 (95% CI 0.943-0.997) Fully automated biventricular volumetric assessments enable efficient and equal risk prediction compared to conventional manual approaches. In addition to significant time saving, this may provide the tools for optimized clinical management and stratification of patients with severe AS undergoing TAVR.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging is considered the reference standard for assessing cardiac morphology and function and has demonstrated prognostic utility in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Novel fully automated analyses may facilitate data analyses but have not yet been compared against conventional manual data acquisition in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS).
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Fully automated and manual biventricular assessments were performed in 139 AS patients scheduled for TAVR using commercially available software (suiteHEART®, Neosoft; QMass®, Medis Medical Imaging Systems). Volumetric assessment included left ventricular (LV) mass, LV/right ventricular (RV) end-diastolic/end-systolic volume, LV/RV stroke volume, and LV/RV ejection fraction (EF). Results of fully automated and manual analyses were compared. Regression analyses and receiver operator characteristics including area under the curve (AUC) calculation for prediction of the primary study endpoint cardiovascular (CV) death were performed.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Fully automated and manual assessment of LVEF revealed similar prediction of CV mortality in univariable (manual: hazard ratio (HR) 0.970 (95% CI 0.943-0.997)
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Fully automated biventricular volumetric assessments enable efficient and equal risk prediction compared to conventional manual approaches. In addition to significant time saving, this may provide the tools for optimized clinical management and stratification of patients with severe AS undergoing TAVR.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35539443
doi: 10.1155/2022/1368878
pmc: PMC9046000
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1368878Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Ruben Evertz et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.
Références
Radiology. 1998 Aug;208(2):453-7
pubmed: 9680575
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2019 Apr 25;21(1):24
pubmed: 31023305
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Apr;8(4):
pubmed: 25852129
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 Jan;12(1):38-48
pubmed: 30448114
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Oct 19;78(16):1621-1631
pubmed: 34649700
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 Nov;11(11):1654-1663
pubmed: 29550305
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Oct 20;21(11):1259-1261
pubmed: 33020801
Circulation. 2005 Dec 13;112(24):3738-44
pubmed: 16330684
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2005;7(5):775-82
pubmed: 16353438
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2018 Sep 14;20(1):65
pubmed: 30217194
Med Image Anal. 2016 May;30:108-119
pubmed: 26917105
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
pubmed: 2868172
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Nov;36(11):2239-2247
pubmed: 32677023
Am Heart J. 2004 Feb;147(2):218-23
pubmed: 14760316
Eur Heart J. 2018 Jan 7;39(2):119-177
pubmed: 28886621
Sci Rep. 2021 Jun 2;11(1):11648
pubmed: 34078942
Heart. 2008 Jul;94(7):943-8
pubmed: 18552230
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020 Mar 12;22(1):19
pubmed: 32160925
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Apr;13(4):1087-1090
pubmed: 31864981
Eur Heart J. 2017 Sep 21;38(36):2739-2791
pubmed: 28886619
Circulation. 2010 Feb 9;121(5):692-705
pubmed: 20142462
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Jun 1;77(21):2717-2746
pubmed: 33888385
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Jan 22;11(2):145-157
pubmed: 29289632
Am Heart J. 2020 Jul;225:138-148
pubmed: 32502877
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Feb;13(2):187-95
pubmed: 22109245
Eur Heart J. 2021 Aug 7;42(30):2885-2896
pubmed: 33748852
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Mar 27;71(12):1313-1321
pubmed: 29566814
Eur Heart J. 2021 Sep 21;42(36):3599-3726
pubmed: 34447992
Eur Heart J. 2020 Jan 14;41(3):407-477
pubmed: 31504439
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020 Jun 22;22(1):46
pubmed: 32564773
Am J Cardiol. 2002 Jul 1;90(1):29-34
pubmed: 12088775
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Sep 15;9(18):e016612
pubmed: 32873121
Eur Heart J. 2022 Feb 12;43(7):561-632
pubmed: 34453165
Biometrics. 1988 Sep;44(3):837-45
pubmed: 3203132
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2018 Nov;37(11):2514-2525
pubmed: 29994302
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Nov;13(11):954-60
pubmed: 22634739
Med Image Anal. 2017 Jul;39:44-55
pubmed: 28432954