Quantitative Assessment of Left Ventricular Function and Myocardial Mass: A Comparison of Coronary CT Angiography with Cardiac MRI and Echocardiography

被引:13
|
作者
Kara, Bedia [1 ]
Nayman, Alaaddin [2 ]
Guler, Ibrahim [2 ]
Gul, Enes Elvin [3 ]
Koplay, Mustafa [2 ]
Paksoy, Yahya [2 ]
机构
[1] Buyuksehir Hosp, Dept Radiol, Konya, Turkey
[2] Selcuk Univ, Dept Radiol, Fac Med, Konya, Turkey
[3] Medipol Mega Univ, Dept Cardiol, Istanbul, Turkey
关键词
Echocardiography; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Multidetector Computed Tomography; Ventricular Function; Left;
D O I
10.12659/PJR.895843
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the left ventricular parameters obtained from multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) studies with two-dimensional echocardiography (2DE), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is accepted as the gold standard in the evaluation of left ventricular functions. The study also aimed to evaluate whether or not there is a relationship between the MR-Argus and CMR tools software programs which are used in post-process calculations of data obtained by MRI. Material/Methods: Forty patients with an average age of 51.4 +/- 14.9 years who had been scanned with cardiac MDCT were evaluated with cardiac MRI and 2DE. End-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), stroke volume (SV), ejection fraction (EF), cardiac output (CO), and myocardial mass values calculated by MDCT, MRI, and 2DE were compared with each other. Two different MR software programs were used to compare left ventricular functions. The CMR tools LV tutorials method is accepted as the gold standard because it can be used in three-dimensional functional evaluation. The Pearson Correlation and Bland-Altman analysis were performed to compare the results from the two MR methods (MR-Argus and CMR tools) and the results from both the MDCT and the 2DE with the CMR tools results. Results: Strong positive correlations for EF values were found between the MDCT and CMR tools (r=0.702 p<0.001), and between the MR-Argus and CMR tools (r=0.746 p<0.001). The correlation between the 2DE and CMR tools (r=0.449 p<0.004), however, was only moderate. Similar results were obtained for the other parameters. The strongest correlation for ESV, EDV, and EF was between the two MR software programs. The correlation coefficient between the MDCT and CMR tools is close to the correlation coefficient between the two software programs. While the correlation between 2DE and CMR tools was satisfactory for ESV, EDV, and CO values, it was at a moderate level for the other parameters. Conclusions: Left ventricular functional analysis can be performed easily and reliably with cardiac MDCT used for coronary artery evaluation and it also gives more accurate results than 2DE.
引用
收藏
页码:95 / 102
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] MEASUREMENT OF LEFT-VENTRICULAR MASS IN HYPERTROPHIC CARDIOMYOPATHY USING MRI - COMPARISON WITH ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY
    ALLISON, JD
    FLICKINGER, FW
    WRIGHT, JC
    FALLS, DG
    PRISANT, LM
    VONDOHLEN, TW
    FRANK, MJ
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 1993, 11 (03) : 329 - 334
  • [12] Comparison of echocardiography using tissue harmonics and contrast harmonics with radionuclide angiography for the assessment of left ventricular function
    Almeda, FQ
    Hendel, RC
    Macioch, JE
    Sandelski, J
    Parrillo, JE
    Meyer, PM
    Johnson, M
    Daniels, ML
    Go, VU
    Feinstein, SB
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE MEDICINE, 2003, 51 (06) : 366 - 372
  • [13] Assessment of left ventricular function: comparison of cardiac multidetector-row computed tomography with two-dimension standard echocardiography for assessment of left ventricular function
    Bansal, Darpan
    Singh, Robin M.
    Sarkar, Mrinalini
    Sureddi, Ravi
    Mcbreen, Kelly C.
    Griffis, Timothy
    Sinha, Anjan
    Mehta, Jawahar L.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING, 2008, 24 (03) : 317 - 325
  • [14] Left Ventricular Pseudoaneurysm by Cardiac CT Angiography
    Gopal, Ambarish
    Pal, Raveen
    Karlsberg, Ronald P.
    Budoff, Matthew J.
    JOURNAL OF INVASIVE CARDIOLOGY, 2008, 20 (07) : 370 - 371
  • [15] Assessment of left ventricular function: comparison of cardiac multidetector-row computed tomography with two-dimension standard echocardiography for assessment of left ventricular function
    Darpan Bansal
    Robin M. Singh
    Mrinalini Sarkar
    Ravi Sureddi
    Kelly C. Mcbreen
    Timothy Griffis
    Anjan Sinha
    Jawahar L. Mehta
    The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, 2008, 24 : 317 - 325
  • [16] Comparison of Echocardiography, Cardiac Magnetic Resonance, and Computed Tomographic Imaging for the Evaluation of Left Ventricular Myocardial Function: Part 1 (Global Assessment)
    Menhel Kinno
    Prashant Nagpal
    Stephen Horgan
    Alfonso H. Waller
    Current Cardiology Reports, 2017, 19
  • [17] Cardiac CT Assessment of Right and Left Ventricular and Valvular Function
    Maan Malahfji
    Mouaz H. Al-Mallah
    Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports, 2019, 12
  • [18] Comparison of Echocardiography, Cardiac Magnetic Resonance, and Computed Tomographic Imaging for the Evaluation of Left Ventricular Myocardial Function: Part 1 (Global Assessment)
    Kinno, Menhel
    Nagpal, Prashant
    Horgan, Stephen
    Waller, Alfonso H.
    CURRENT CARDIOLOGY REPORTS, 2017, 19 (01)
  • [19] Cardiac CT Assessment of Right and Left Ventricular and Valvular Function
    Malahfji, Maan
    Al-Mallah, Mouaz H.
    CURRENT CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING REPORTS, 2019, 12 (06)
  • [20] Comparison of 2D Echocardiography and Cardiac Cine MRI in the Assessment of Regional Left Ventricular Wall Thickness
    van Hal, Vera H. J.
    Zhao, Debbie
    Gilbert, Kathleen
    Gamage, Thiranja P. Babarenda
    Mauger, Charlene
    Doughty, Robert N.
    Legget, Malcolm E.
    Zhao, Jichao
    Nalar, Aaqel
    Camara, Oscar
    Young, Alistair A.
    Wang, Vicky Y.
    Nash, Martyn P.
    STATISTICAL ATLASES AND COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF THE HEART: MULTI-SEQUENCE CMR SEGMENTATION, CRT-EPIGGY AND LV FULL QUANTIFICATION CHALLENGES, 2020, 12009 : 52 - 62