Limits...
Single breath-hold 3D measurement of left atrial volume using compressed sensing cardiovascular magnetic resonance and a non-model-based reconstruction approach.

Vardoulis O, Monney P, Bermano A, Vaxman A, Gotsman C, Schwitter J, Stuber M, Stergiopulos N, Schwitter J - J Cardiovasc Magn Reson (2015)

Bottom Line: For the new method the calculated volumes were not significantly different when different orientations of the CS-cineCMR slices were applied to cover the LA phantoms.Patient study: The CS-cineCMR LA volumes of the mid-diastolic frame matched closely with the reference LA volume (measured by 3D-HR-CMR) with a difference of -2.66 ± 6.5 ml (3.0% underestimation; true LA volumes: 63 ml, 62 ml, and 395 ml).Finally, a high intra- and inter-observer agreement for maximal and minimal LA volume measurement is also shown.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Laboratory of Hemodynamics and Cardiovascular Technology, Institute of Bioengineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. orestis.vardoulis@epfl.ch.

ABSTRACT

Background: Left atrial (LA) dilatation is associated with a large variety of cardiac diseases. Current cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) strategies to measure LA volumes are based on multi-breath-hold multi-slice acquisitions, which are time-consuming and susceptible to misregistration.

Aim: To develop a time-efficient single breath-hold 3D CMR acquisition and reconstruction method to precisely measure LA volumes and function.

Methods: A highly accelerated compressed-sensing multi-slice cine sequence (CS-cineCMR) was combined with a non-model-based 3D reconstruction method to measure LA volumes with high temporal and spatial resolution during a single breath-hold. This approach was validated in LA phantoms of different shapes and applied in 3 patients. In addition, the influence of slice orientations on accuracy was evaluated in the LA phantoms for the new approach in comparison with a conventional model-based biplane area-length reconstruction. As a reference in patients, a self-navigated high-resolution whole-heart 3D dataset (3D-HR-CMR) was acquired during mid-diastole to yield accurate LA volumes.

Results: Phantom studies. LA volumes were accurately measured by CS-cineCMR with a mean difference of -4.73 ± 1.75 ml (-8.67 ± 3.54%, r2 = 0.94). For the new method the calculated volumes were not significantly different when different orientations of the CS-cineCMR slices were applied to cover the LA phantoms. Long-axis "aligned" vs "not aligned" with the phantom long-axis yielded similar differences vs the reference volume (-4.87 ± 1.73 ml vs. -4.45 ± 1.97 ml, p = 0.67) and short-axis "perpendicular" vs. "not-perpendicular" with the LA long-axis (-4.72 ± 1.66 ml vs. -4.75 ± 2.13 ml; p = 0.98). The conventional bi-plane area-length method was susceptible for slice orientations (p = 0.0085 for the interaction of "slice orientation" and "reconstruction technique", 2-way ANOVA for repeated measures). To use the 3D-HR-CMR as the reference for LA volumes in patients, it was validated in the LA phantoms (mean difference: -1.37 ± 1.35 ml, -2.38 ± 2.44%, r2 = 0.97). Patient study: The CS-cineCMR LA volumes of the mid-diastolic frame matched closely with the reference LA volume (measured by 3D-HR-CMR) with a difference of -2.66 ± 6.5 ml (3.0% underestimation; true LA volumes: 63 ml, 62 ml, and 395 ml). Finally, a high intra- and inter-observer agreement for maximal and minimal LA volume measurement is also shown.

Conclusions: The proposed method combines a highly accelerated single-breathhold compressed-sensing multi-slice CMR technique with a non-model-based 3D reconstruction to accurately and reproducibly measure LA volumes and function.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

a. Comparison: CS-cineCMR versus reference (water displacement). Bland-Altman and regression analysis for the comparison between reference volumes and CS-cineCMR. In the Bland- Altman plots, the middle (solid) line represents the mean of differences and the two dashed lines represent ±2*SD. b. Comparison: biplane Area-Length versus reference (water displacement). Bland-Altman and regression analysis for the comparison between reference volumes and 3D-HR-CMR. In the Bland- Altman plots, the middle (solid) line represents the mean of differences and the dashed lines represent ±2*SD
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4464709&req=5

Fig2: a. Comparison: CS-cineCMR versus reference (water displacement). Bland-Altman and regression analysis for the comparison between reference volumes and CS-cineCMR. In the Bland- Altman plots, the middle (solid) line represents the mean of differences and the two dashed lines represent ±2*SD. b. Comparison: biplane Area-Length versus reference (water displacement). Bland-Altman and regression analysis for the comparison between reference volumes and 3D-HR-CMR. In the Bland- Altman plots, the middle (solid) line represents the mean of differences and the dashed lines represent ±2*SD

Mentions: LA phantom volumes were measured by CS-cineCMR and compared against the corresponding reference volumes measured with the water displacement method. The Bland-Altman analysis (Fig. 2a) resulted in an overall mean difference of −4.73 ± 1.75 ml (−8.8 ± 3.3 %; p < 0.01). The correlation between the two techniques was high with r2 equal to 0.94 and a slope close to one (Fig. 2a). Detailed results are given in Table 2.Fig. 2


Single breath-hold 3D measurement of left atrial volume using compressed sensing cardiovascular magnetic resonance and a non-model-based reconstruction approach.

Vardoulis O, Monney P, Bermano A, Vaxman A, Gotsman C, Schwitter J, Stuber M, Stergiopulos N, Schwitter J - J Cardiovasc Magn Reson (2015)

a. Comparison: CS-cineCMR versus reference (water displacement). Bland-Altman and regression analysis for the comparison between reference volumes and CS-cineCMR. In the Bland- Altman plots, the middle (solid) line represents the mean of differences and the two dashed lines represent ±2*SD. b. Comparison: biplane Area-Length versus reference (water displacement). Bland-Altman and regression analysis for the comparison between reference volumes and 3D-HR-CMR. In the Bland- Altman plots, the middle (solid) line represents the mean of differences and the dashed lines represent ±2*SD
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4464709&req=5

Fig2: a. Comparison: CS-cineCMR versus reference (water displacement). Bland-Altman and regression analysis for the comparison between reference volumes and CS-cineCMR. In the Bland- Altman plots, the middle (solid) line represents the mean of differences and the two dashed lines represent ±2*SD. b. Comparison: biplane Area-Length versus reference (water displacement). Bland-Altman and regression analysis for the comparison between reference volumes and 3D-HR-CMR. In the Bland- Altman plots, the middle (solid) line represents the mean of differences and the dashed lines represent ±2*SD
Mentions: LA phantom volumes were measured by CS-cineCMR and compared against the corresponding reference volumes measured with the water displacement method. The Bland-Altman analysis (Fig. 2a) resulted in an overall mean difference of −4.73 ± 1.75 ml (−8.8 ± 3.3 %; p < 0.01). The correlation between the two techniques was high with r2 equal to 0.94 and a slope close to one (Fig. 2a). Detailed results are given in Table 2.Fig. 2

Bottom Line: For the new method the calculated volumes were not significantly different when different orientations of the CS-cineCMR slices were applied to cover the LA phantoms.Patient study: The CS-cineCMR LA volumes of the mid-diastolic frame matched closely with the reference LA volume (measured by 3D-HR-CMR) with a difference of -2.66 ± 6.5 ml (3.0% underestimation; true LA volumes: 63 ml, 62 ml, and 395 ml).Finally, a high intra- and inter-observer agreement for maximal and minimal LA volume measurement is also shown.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Laboratory of Hemodynamics and Cardiovascular Technology, Institute of Bioengineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. orestis.vardoulis@epfl.ch.

ABSTRACT

Background: Left atrial (LA) dilatation is associated with a large variety of cardiac diseases. Current cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) strategies to measure LA volumes are based on multi-breath-hold multi-slice acquisitions, which are time-consuming and susceptible to misregistration.

Aim: To develop a time-efficient single breath-hold 3D CMR acquisition and reconstruction method to precisely measure LA volumes and function.

Methods: A highly accelerated compressed-sensing multi-slice cine sequence (CS-cineCMR) was combined with a non-model-based 3D reconstruction method to measure LA volumes with high temporal and spatial resolution during a single breath-hold. This approach was validated in LA phantoms of different shapes and applied in 3 patients. In addition, the influence of slice orientations on accuracy was evaluated in the LA phantoms for the new approach in comparison with a conventional model-based biplane area-length reconstruction. As a reference in patients, a self-navigated high-resolution whole-heart 3D dataset (3D-HR-CMR) was acquired during mid-diastole to yield accurate LA volumes.

Results: Phantom studies. LA volumes were accurately measured by CS-cineCMR with a mean difference of -4.73 ± 1.75 ml (-8.67 ± 3.54%, r2 = 0.94). For the new method the calculated volumes were not significantly different when different orientations of the CS-cineCMR slices were applied to cover the LA phantoms. Long-axis "aligned" vs "not aligned" with the phantom long-axis yielded similar differences vs the reference volume (-4.87 ± 1.73 ml vs. -4.45 ± 1.97 ml, p = 0.67) and short-axis "perpendicular" vs. "not-perpendicular" with the LA long-axis (-4.72 ± 1.66 ml vs. -4.75 ± 2.13 ml; p = 0.98). The conventional bi-plane area-length method was susceptible for slice orientations (p = 0.0085 for the interaction of "slice orientation" and "reconstruction technique", 2-way ANOVA for repeated measures). To use the 3D-HR-CMR as the reference for LA volumes in patients, it was validated in the LA phantoms (mean difference: -1.37 ± 1.35 ml, -2.38 ± 2.44%, r2 = 0.97). Patient study: The CS-cineCMR LA volumes of the mid-diastolic frame matched closely with the reference LA volume (measured by 3D-HR-CMR) with a difference of -2.66 ± 6.5 ml (3.0% underestimation; true LA volumes: 63 ml, 62 ml, and 395 ml). Finally, a high intra- and inter-observer agreement for maximal and minimal LA volume measurement is also shown.

Conclusions: The proposed method combines a highly accelerated single-breathhold compressed-sensing multi-slice CMR technique with a non-model-based 3D reconstruction to accurately and reproducibly measure LA volumes and function.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus