Comparison of cine cardiac magnetic resonance and echocardiography derived diameters of the aortic root in a large population-based cohort

被引:0
|
作者
Jan-Per Wenzel
Julius Nikorowitsch
Ramona bei der Kellen
Luisa Dohm
Evaldas Girdauskas
Gunnar Lund
Peter Bannas
Stefan Blankenberg
Tilo Kölbel
Ersin Cavus
Kai Müllerleile
Michael Gerhard Kaul
Gerhard Adam
Julius Matthias Weinrich
机构
[1] UKE Hamburg,Department of Cardiology, University Heart and Vascular Center Hamburg
[2] University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine
[3] German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK),Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Heart and Vascular Center Hamburg
[4] Partner Site Hamburg/Kiel/Lübeck,Department of Vascular Medicine, German Aortic Center Hamburg, University Heart and Vascular Center Hamburg
[5] UKE Hamburg,undefined
[6] UKE Hamburg,undefined
来源
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and cine cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) are established imaging methods of the aortic root. We aimed to evaluate the comparability of measurements in TTE and standard cine CMR sequences of the aortic root. Our study included 741 subjects (mean age 63.5 ± 8 years, 43.7% female) from the Hamburg City Health Study (HCHS). Subjects underwent CMR and TTE. Aortic root measurements were performed at the level of the aortic annulus (AoAn), sinus of Valsalva (SoV), and sinotubular junction (STJ) by standard cine CMR in left ventricular long axis and left ventricular outflow tract view. Measurements were performed applying the leading-edge to leading-edge (LL) convention and inner-edge to inner-edge (II) convention in TTE and the II convention in CMR. Inter correlation coefficients (ICCs) demonstrated high inter- and intraobserver reproducibility for CMR and TTE measurements of SoV and STJ (ICCs 0.9–0.98) and moderate reproducibility for AoAn (ICCs 0.68–0.91). CMR measurements of SoV and STJ showed strong agreement with TTE: while correlations were comparable (r = 0.75–0.85) bias was lower with TTE II (bias − 0.1 to − 0.74) versus TTE LL measurements (mean bias − 1.49 to − 2.58 mm). The agreement for AoAn was fair (r = 0.51–0.57) with variable bias (mean bias 0.39–3.9). Standard cine CMR and TTE derived aortic root measurements are reproducible and comparable with higher agreement for TTE II instead of LL measurements. These results support an interchangeable application of TTE and standard CMR for screening of aortic root diseases thereby possibly reducing redundant multimodality imaging.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of cine cardiac magnetic resonance and echocardiography derived diameters of the aortic root in a large population-based cohort
    Wenzel, Jan-Per
    Nikorowitsch, Julius
    Kellen, Ramona Bei Der
    Dohm, Luisa
    Girdauskas, Evaldas
    Lund, Gunnar
    Bannas, Peter
    Blankenberg, Stefan
    Koelbel, Tilo
    Cavus, Ersin
    Muellerleile, Kai
    Kaul, Michael Gerhard
    Adam, Gerhard
    Weinrich, Julius Matthias
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01)
  • [2] Ascending Aortic Diameters in Congenital Aortic Stenosis: Cardiac Magnetic Resonance versus Transthoracic Echocardiography
    van der Linde, Denise
    Rossi, Alexia
    Yap, Sing C.
    McGhie, Jackie S.
    van den Bosch, Annemien E.
    Kirschbaum, Sharon W. M.
    Russo, Brunella
    van Dijk, Arie P. J.
    Moelker, Adriaan
    Krestin, Gabriel P.
    van Geuns, Robert-Jan M.
    Roos-Hesselink, Jolien W.
    ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY-A JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ULTRASOUND AND ALLIED TECHNIQUES, 2013, 30 (05): : 497 - 504
  • [3] EVALUATION OF AORTIC REGURGITATION BY CARDIAC CINE MAGNETIC-RESONANCE-IMAGING - PLANAR ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON TO DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY
    AURIGEMMA, G
    REICHEK, N
    SCHIEBLER, M
    AXEL, L
    CARDIOLOGY, 1991, 78 (04) : 340 - 347
  • [4] Comparison of Cine-MRI and Transthoracic Echocardiography for the Assessment of Aortic Root Diameters in Patients with Suspected Marfan Syndrome
    Bannas, P.
    Rybczynski, M.
    Sheikhzadeh, S.
    von Kodolitsch, Y.
    Derlin, T.
    Yamamura, J.
    Lund, G.
    Adam, G.
    Groth, M.
    ROFO-FORTSCHRITTE AUF DEM GEBIET DER RONTGENSTRAHLEN UND DER BILDGEBENDEN VERFAHREN, 2015, 187 (11): : 1022 - 1028
  • [5] Use of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Echocardiography in Population-Based Studies Why, Where, and When?
    Marwick, Thomas H.
    Neubauer, Stefan
    Petersen, Steffen E.
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING, 2013, 6 (04) : 590 - 596
  • [6] COMPARISON OF CINE MAGNETIC-RESONANCE-IMAGING WITH DOPPLER-ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY FOR THE EVALUATION OF AORTIC REGURGITATION
    PFLUGFELDER, PW
    LANDZBERG, JS
    CASSIDY, MM
    CHEITLIN, MD
    AUFFERMANN, W
    HIGGINS, CB
    CIRCULATION, 1987, 76 (04) : 31 - 31
  • [7] Evaluation of aortic stenosis - A comparison of cardiac catheterisation, magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography
    Kupfahl, C
    Mahrholdt, H
    Honold, M
    Vogelsberg, H
    Meinhardt, G
    Wagner, A
    Sechtem, U
    CIRCULATION, 2003, 108 (17) : 431 - 431
  • [8] Automatic detection of left ventricular contours from contrast echocardiography: Comparison with cardiac cine magnetic resonance
    Morales, MA
    Rodriguez, O
    Positano, V
    Morelos, M
    Sironi, A
    Passera, M
    Lombardi, M
    Roval, D
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2002, 39 (05) : 450A - 451A
  • [9] MEASUREMENT OF PANCREATIC SIZE IN A POPULATION-BASED COHORT: COMPARISON OF ULTRASOUND AND MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
    Aghdassi, Ali
    Schauer, Birgit
    Duscha, David
    Ittermann, Till
    Pickartz, Tilman
    Hartmann, Jan
    Budde, Christoph
    Kromrey, Marie
    Volzke, Henry
    Kuhn, Jens
    Lerch, Markus M.
    Simon, Peter
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2017, 152 (05) : S429 - S429
  • [10] 1060 Evaluation of aortic valve regurgitation by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a comparison with echocardiography
    Nisha Surenderanath
    Faris Al-Mousily
    Douglas Theriaque
    Jonathan Shuster
    Carolyn Spencer
    Margaret M Samyn
    Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 10 (Suppl 1)