Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function.
MRI
cardiac MRI
cine MRI
ejection fraction
left ventricular function
Journal
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2075-4418
Titre abrégé: Diagnostics (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101658402
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Apr 2023
17 Apr 2023
Historique:
received:
24
02
2023
revised:
09
04
2023
accepted:
14
04
2023
medline:
16
5
2023
pubmed:
16
5
2023
entrez:
16
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
(1) Background: With the conventional contour surface method (KfM) for the evaluation of cardiac function parameters, the papillary muscle is considered to be part of the left ventricular volume. This systematic error can be avoided with a relatively easy-to-implement pixel-based evaluation method (PbM). The objective of this thesis is to compare the KfM and the PbM with regard to their difference due to papillary muscle volume exclusion. (2) Material and Methods: In the retrospective study, 191 cardiac-MR image data sets (126 male, 65 female; median age 51 years; age distribution 20-75 years) were analysed. The left ventricular function parameters: end-systolic volume (ESV), end-diastolic volume (EDV), ejection fraction (EF) and stroke volume (SV) were determined using classical KfW (syngo.via and cvi42 = gold standard) and PbM. Papillary muscle volume was calculated and segmented automatically via cvi42. The time required for evaluation with the PbM was collected. (3) Results: The size of EDV was 177 mL (69-444.5 mL) [average, [minimum-maximum]], ESV was 87 mL (20-361.4 mL), SV was 88 mL and EF was 50% (13-80%) in the pixel-based evaluation. The corresponding values with cvi42 were EDV 193 mL (89-476 mL), ESV 101 mL (34-411 mL), SV 90 mL and EF 45% (12-73%) and syngo.via: EDV 188 mL (74-447 mL), ESV 99 mL (29-358 mL), SV 89 mL (27-176 mL) and EF 47% (13-84%). The comparison between the PbM and KfM showed a negative difference for end-diastolic volume, a negative difference for end-systolic volume and a positive difference for ejection fraction. No difference was seen in stroke volume. The mean papillary muscle volume was calculated to be 14.2 mL. The evaluation with PbM took an average of 2:02 min. (4) Conclusion: PbM is easy and fast to perform for the determination of left ventricular cardiac function. It provides comparable results to the established disc/contour area method in terms of stroke volume and measures "true" left ventricular cardiac function while omitting the papillary muscles. This results in an average 6% higher ejection fraction, which can have a significant influence on therapy decisions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37189538
pii: diagnostics13081437
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13081437
pmc: PMC10137814
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jun 8;55(23):2614-62
pubmed: 20513610
Surg Radiol Anat. 2009 Feb;31(2):113-20
pubmed: 18841322
Eur Radiol. 2006 Jul;16(7):1416-23
pubmed: 16607495
Rofo. 2002 Feb;174(2):196-201
pubmed: 11898082
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001 Oct;14(4):362-7
pubmed: 11599059
Eur Heart J. 2012 Oct;33(19):2451-96
pubmed: 22922415
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2002;4(3):327-39
pubmed: 12234104
Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol. 2012 Sep;23(3):196-200
pubmed: 23011600
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017 Oct 1;52(4):616-664
pubmed: 29156023
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Dec 2;64(21):e1-76
pubmed: 24685669
Rofo. 2012 Apr;184(4):345-68
pubmed: 22426867
Clin Res Cardiol. 2019 Apr;108(4):411-429
pubmed: 30203190
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993 May;160(5):979-85
pubmed: 8470613
Rofo. 2004 Oct;176(10):1365-79
pubmed: 15383966
Radiology. 2004 Feb;230(2):389-95
pubmed: 14699186
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Jan 17;12(1):
pubmed: 35054385
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2015 Apr 18;17:29
pubmed: 25928314
Radiology. 1990 Mar;174(3 Pt 1):763-8
pubmed: 2305059
Nature. 2023 Apr;616(7957):520-524
pubmed: 37020027
Pediatr Radiol. 2015 Apr;45(5):651-7
pubmed: 25407955
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1989 May;13(6):1294-300
pubmed: 2703612
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991 Jul;157(1):9-16
pubmed: 2048544
Radiology. 1987 Jun;163(3):697-702
pubmed: 3575717
Am J Cardiol. 2002 Jul 1;90(1):29-34
pubmed: 12088775
Eur Heart J. 2012 Jul;33(14):1787-847
pubmed: 22611136
JAMA. 2001 Jun 13;285(22):2864-70
pubmed: 11401607