Limits...
Comparison of 2D and 3D calculation of left ventricular torsion as circumferential-longitudinal shear angle using cardiovascular magnetic resonance tagging.

Rüssel IK, Tecelão SR, Kuijer JP, Heethaar RM, Marcus JT - J Cardiovasc Magn Reson (2009)

Bottom Line: No significant time-delay was observed between the curves.Bland-Altman analysis revealed a significant positive linear relationship between the difference and the average value of both analysis methods, with the 2D results showing larger values than the 3D.The difference between both methods can be explained by the definition of the 2D method.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Physics and Medical Technology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. i.russel@vumc.nl

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To compare left ventricular (LV) torsion represented as the circumferential-longitudinal (CL) shear angle between 2D and 3D quantification, using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR).

Methods: CMR tagging was performed in six healthy volunteers. From this, LV torsion was calculated using a 2D and a 3D method. The cross-correlation between both methods was evaluated and comparisons were made using Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: The cross-correlation between the curves was r2 = 0.97 +/- 0.02. No significant time-delay was observed between the curves. Bland-Altman analysis revealed a significant positive linear relationship between the difference and the average value of both analysis methods, with the 2D results showing larger values than the 3D. The difference between both methods can be explained by the definition of the 2D method.

Conclusion: LV torsion represented as CL shear quantified by the 2D and 3D analysis methods are strongly related. Therefore, it is suggested to use the faster 2D method for torsion calculation.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Bland-Altman plots for the base-apex (a), base-mid (b) and mid-apex (c) torsion values of the subjects, using T*2D. Notice that the linear relationship between difference and average is reduced as compared to Fig. 4.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2689859&req=5

Figure 5: Bland-Altman plots for the base-apex (a), base-mid (b) and mid-apex (c) torsion values of the subjects, using T*2D. Notice that the linear relationship between difference and average is reduced as compared to Fig. 4.

Mentions: When using T*2D, the difference between the 2D and 3D method between the base-apex curves was no longer significant (p = 0.35). For the base-mid curves, T*2D was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) and for the mid-apex curves T*2D was significantly lower (p < 0.0001). In the Bland-Altman analysis, only weak correlations were found between the difference and the average of both methods (Fig. 5, Table 2); therefore the limits of agreement were no longer calculated as a regression line. Limits of agreement are slightly increased using T*2D, however (Table 2).


Comparison of 2D and 3D calculation of left ventricular torsion as circumferential-longitudinal shear angle using cardiovascular magnetic resonance tagging.

Rüssel IK, Tecelão SR, Kuijer JP, Heethaar RM, Marcus JT - J Cardiovasc Magn Reson (2009)

Bland-Altman plots for the base-apex (a), base-mid (b) and mid-apex (c) torsion values of the subjects, using T*2D. Notice that the linear relationship between difference and average is reduced as compared to Fig. 4.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2689859&req=5

Figure 5: Bland-Altman plots for the base-apex (a), base-mid (b) and mid-apex (c) torsion values of the subjects, using T*2D. Notice that the linear relationship between difference and average is reduced as compared to Fig. 4.
Mentions: When using T*2D, the difference between the 2D and 3D method between the base-apex curves was no longer significant (p = 0.35). For the base-mid curves, T*2D was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) and for the mid-apex curves T*2D was significantly lower (p < 0.0001). In the Bland-Altman analysis, only weak correlations were found between the difference and the average of both methods (Fig. 5, Table 2); therefore the limits of agreement were no longer calculated as a regression line. Limits of agreement are slightly increased using T*2D, however (Table 2).

Bottom Line: No significant time-delay was observed between the curves.Bland-Altman analysis revealed a significant positive linear relationship between the difference and the average value of both analysis methods, with the 2D results showing larger values than the 3D.The difference between both methods can be explained by the definition of the 2D method.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Physics and Medical Technology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. i.russel@vumc.nl

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To compare left ventricular (LV) torsion represented as the circumferential-longitudinal (CL) shear angle between 2D and 3D quantification, using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR).

Methods: CMR tagging was performed in six healthy volunteers. From this, LV torsion was calculated using a 2D and a 3D method. The cross-correlation between both methods was evaluated and comparisons were made using Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: The cross-correlation between the curves was r2 = 0.97 +/- 0.02. No significant time-delay was observed between the curves. Bland-Altman analysis revealed a significant positive linear relationship between the difference and the average value of both analysis methods, with the 2D results showing larger values than the 3D. The difference between both methods can be explained by the definition of the 2D method.

Conclusion: LV torsion represented as CL shear quantified by the 2D and 3D analysis methods are strongly related. Therefore, it is suggested to use the faster 2D method for torsion calculation.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus