Limits...
Left atrial structure and functional quantitation using cardiovascular magnetic resonance and multimodality tissue tracking: validation and reproducibility assessment.

Zareian M, Ciuffo L, Habibi M, Opdahl A, Chamera EH, Wu CO, Bluemke DA, Lima JA, Venkatesh BA - J Cardiovasc Magn Reson (2015)

Bottom Line: LA total, active and passive ejection fractions were calculated.Pearson's correlation and Bland-Altman analysis were used to compare the measurements.In a second sample of 25 subjects (age: 65.7 ± 7.1, 72% males) inter study, intra and inter reader reliability analysis was performed.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: MR 110, Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. mytra_z@hotmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Left atrium (LA) strain, volume and function are important markers of cardiovascular disease and myocardial impairment. We aimed to assess the accuracy of LA biplane volume and function measured by Multimodality Tissue Tracking (MTT). Also we assessed the inter-study reproducibility for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) derived LA volume and function parameters.

Methods: Thirty subjects (mean age: 71.3 ± 8.7, 87% male) including twenty subjects with cardiovascular events and ten healthy subjects, with CMR were evaluated in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). LA volumes were computed by the modified biplane method from 2- and 4-chamber projections and the Simpson's method from short-axis slices using both methods - manual and semi-automated delineation using MTT. LA total, active and passive ejection fractions were calculated. Pearson's correlation and Bland-Altman analysis were used to compare the measurements. In a second sample of 25 subjects (age: 65.7 ± 7.1, 72% males) inter study, intra and inter reader reliability analysis was performed. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was evaluated.

Results: Left atrial MTT structural and functional parameters were not different from manual delineation, yet image analysis was only half as time consuming on average with MTT. Maximal volume MTT was not different between the Simpson's and Biplane methods, functional parameters, however were different. MTT allowed us to measure multiple LA parameters with good-excellent (ICC; 0.88- 0.98, p < 0.001) intra-and inter reader reproducibility and fair-good (ICC; 0.44-0.82, p < 0.05-0.001) inter study reproducibility.

Conclusions: MTT derived LA biplane volume and function is accurate and reproducible and is suited for use in longitudinal studies.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

a–d Linear regressions and Bland-Altman plots analysis. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) and SD = Standard deviation. MTT: Biplane area-length vs. Simpson’s (a - b); MTT: LA ejection fraction derived Biplane area-length vs. LA ejection fraction derived Simpson’s (c - d)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4487838&req=5

Fig5: a–d Linear regressions and Bland-Altman plots analysis. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) and SD = Standard deviation. MTT: Biplane area-length vs. Simpson’s (a - b); MTT: LA ejection fraction derived Biplane area-length vs. LA ejection fraction derived Simpson’s (c - d)

Mentions: LA maximum volumes obtained from MTT method were not significantly different between Simpson’s and biplane methods: 85.2 ± 35.2 vs. 86.5 ± 33.6 (Fig. 5). However, there was a statistically significant difference between all the functional global parameters: LAEF (Biplane: 0.46 ± 0.2, Simpson: 0.33 ± 0.10, p <0.001), LAPEF (Biplane: 0.18 ± 0.05, Simpson: 0.11 ± 0.04, p <0.001) and LAAEF (Biplane: 0.37 ± 0.07, Simpson: 0.27 ± 0.06, p <0.001). Functional measurements established by Simpson’s method were systematically lower. The same trend was found in the analysis of biplane vs. Simpson’s performed by manual method (Table 3).Fig. 5


Left atrial structure and functional quantitation using cardiovascular magnetic resonance and multimodality tissue tracking: validation and reproducibility assessment.

Zareian M, Ciuffo L, Habibi M, Opdahl A, Chamera EH, Wu CO, Bluemke DA, Lima JA, Venkatesh BA - J Cardiovasc Magn Reson (2015)

a–d Linear regressions and Bland-Altman plots analysis. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) and SD = Standard deviation. MTT: Biplane area-length vs. Simpson’s (a - b); MTT: LA ejection fraction derived Biplane area-length vs. LA ejection fraction derived Simpson’s (c - d)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4487838&req=5

Fig5: a–d Linear regressions and Bland-Altman plots analysis. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) and SD = Standard deviation. MTT: Biplane area-length vs. Simpson’s (a - b); MTT: LA ejection fraction derived Biplane area-length vs. LA ejection fraction derived Simpson’s (c - d)
Mentions: LA maximum volumes obtained from MTT method were not significantly different between Simpson’s and biplane methods: 85.2 ± 35.2 vs. 86.5 ± 33.6 (Fig. 5). However, there was a statistically significant difference between all the functional global parameters: LAEF (Biplane: 0.46 ± 0.2, Simpson: 0.33 ± 0.10, p <0.001), LAPEF (Biplane: 0.18 ± 0.05, Simpson: 0.11 ± 0.04, p <0.001) and LAAEF (Biplane: 0.37 ± 0.07, Simpson: 0.27 ± 0.06, p <0.001). Functional measurements established by Simpson’s method were systematically lower. The same trend was found in the analysis of biplane vs. Simpson’s performed by manual method (Table 3).Fig. 5

Bottom Line: LA total, active and passive ejection fractions were calculated.Pearson's correlation and Bland-Altman analysis were used to compare the measurements.In a second sample of 25 subjects (age: 65.7 ± 7.1, 72% males) inter study, intra and inter reader reliability analysis was performed.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: MR 110, Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. mytra_z@hotmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Left atrium (LA) strain, volume and function are important markers of cardiovascular disease and myocardial impairment. We aimed to assess the accuracy of LA biplane volume and function measured by Multimodality Tissue Tracking (MTT). Also we assessed the inter-study reproducibility for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) derived LA volume and function parameters.

Methods: Thirty subjects (mean age: 71.3 ± 8.7, 87% male) including twenty subjects with cardiovascular events and ten healthy subjects, with CMR were evaluated in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). LA volumes were computed by the modified biplane method from 2- and 4-chamber projections and the Simpson's method from short-axis slices using both methods - manual and semi-automated delineation using MTT. LA total, active and passive ejection fractions were calculated. Pearson's correlation and Bland-Altman analysis were used to compare the measurements. In a second sample of 25 subjects (age: 65.7 ± 7.1, 72% males) inter study, intra and inter reader reliability analysis was performed. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was evaluated.

Results: Left atrial MTT structural and functional parameters were not different from manual delineation, yet image analysis was only half as time consuming on average with MTT. Maximal volume MTT was not different between the Simpson's and Biplane methods, functional parameters, however were different. MTT allowed us to measure multiple LA parameters with good-excellent (ICC; 0.88- 0.98, p < 0.001) intra-and inter reader reproducibility and fair-good (ICC; 0.44-0.82, p < 0.05-0.001) inter study reproducibility.

Conclusions: MTT derived LA biplane volume and function is accurate and reproducible and is suited for use in longitudinal studies.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus