Cardiac image modeling tool for quantitative analysis of global and regional cardiac wall motion

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 44, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 271-278

  Hung, Jessica ^a   Francois, Christopher ^a   Nelson, Nicole A ^a   Young, Alistair ^b   Cowan, Brett R ^b   Jerecic, Renate ^c   Carr, James ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^c SIEMENS CORPORATE RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Cardiac image modeling; Regional wall motion analysis; Semi automated guide point modeling

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CARDIAC IMAGE MODELING TOOL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEART EJECTION FRACTION; HEART FUNCTION; HEART MOVEMENT; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; VISUAL INFORMATION;

EID: 67651056282     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31819c96e3     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Sanz G, Castaner A, Betriu A, et al. Determinants of prognosis in survivors of myocardial infarction: a prospective clinical angiographic study. N Engl J Med. 1982;306:1065-1070.
2. Weiss JL, Marino PN, Shapiro EP. Myocardial infarct expansion: recognition, significance and pathology. Am J Cardiol. 199;68:35D-40D.
3. Dewey M, Muller M, Eddicks S, et al. Evaluation of global and regional left ventricular function with 16-slice computed tomography, biplane cineventriculography, and two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:2034-2044.
4. Hoffman R, von Bardeleben S, Kasprzak JD, et al. Analysis of regional left ventricular function by cineventriculography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and unenhanced and contrast-enhanced echocardiography - a multicenter comparison of methods. JAm Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:121-128.
5. Bellenger NG, Burgess MI, Ray SG, et al. Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance; are they interchangeable? Eur Heart J. 2000;21:1387-1396.
6. Hoffmann R, von Bardeleben S, Ten Cate F, et al. Assessment of systolic left ventricular function: a multi-centre comparison of cineventriculography cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, unenhanced and contrast-enhanced echo-cardiography. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:607-616.
7. Kuhl HP, Spuentrup E, Wall A, et al. Assessment of myocardial function with interactive non-breath-hold real-time MR imaging: comparison with echocardiography and breath-hold Cine MR imaging. Radiology. 2004; 231:198-207.
8. Constantine G, Shan K, Flamm SD, et al. Role ofMRI in clinical cardiology.
9. The Lancet. 2004;363:2162-2171.
10. Picard MH, Popp RL, Weyman AE. Assessment of left ventricular function by echocardiography: a technique in evolution. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2008;21:14-21.
11. Busch S, Johnson TR, Wintersperger BJ, et al. Quantitative assessment of left ventricular function with dual-source CT in comparison to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: initial findings. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:570-575.
12. Wu YW, Tadamura E, Yamamuro M, et al. Estimation ofglobal and regional cardiac function using 64-slice computed tomography: a comparison study with echocardiography, gated-SPECT and cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Int JCardiol. 2008;128:69-76.
13. Earls JP, Ho VB, Foo TK, et al. Cardiac MRI: recent progress and continued challenges. JMagn Reson Imaging. 2002;16:111-127.
14. Chan J, Jenkins C, Khafagi F, et al. What is the optimal clinical technique for measurement of left ventricular volume after myocardial infarction? A comparative study of 3-dimensional echocardiography, single photon emission computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. JAmSoc Echocardiogr. 2006;19:192-201.
15. Herz SL, Ingrassia CM, Homma S, et al. Parameterization ofleft ventricular wall motion for detection of regional ischemia. Ann Biomed Eng. 2005;33: 912-919.
16. Young AA, Axel L. Three-dimensional motion and deformation of the heart wall: estimation with spatial modulation of magnetization - a model-based approach. Radiology. 1992;185:241-247.
17. Borges AC, Kivelitz D, Walde T, et al. Apical tissue tracking echocardiography for characterization of regional left ventricular function: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging in patients after myocardial infarction. JAm Soc Echocardiogr. 2003;16:254-262.
18. Young AA, Cowan BR, Thrupp SF, et al. Left ventricular mass and volume: fast calculation with guide-point modeling on MR images. Radiology. 2000; 216:597-602.
19. Swingen CM, Seethamraju RT, Jerosch-Herold M. Feedback-assisted threedimensional reconstruction of the left ventricle with MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;17:528-537.
20. van der Geest RJ, Lelieveldt BPF, Angelie E, et al. Evaluation of a new method for automated detection ofleft ventricularboundaries in time series of magnetic resonance images using an active appearance motion model. JCardiovasc Magn Reson. 2004;6:609-617.
21. Bloomer TN, Plein S, Radjenovic A, et al. Cine MRI using steady state free precession in the radial long axis orientation is a fast accurate method for obtaining volumetric data of the left ventricle. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;14:685-692.
22. Kirschbaum SW, Baks T, Gronenschild EH, et al. Addition of the long-axis information to short-axis contours reduces interstudy variability of leftventricular analysis in cardiac magnetic resonance studies. Invest Radiol. 2008;45:1-6.
23. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. JNucl Cardiol. 2002;9:240-245.
24. Chan J, Khafagi F, Young AA, et al. Impact of coronary revascularization and transmural extent of scar on regional left ventricular remodelling. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:1608 -1617.
25. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;i:307-310.
26. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8:135-160.
27. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa, I. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43:543-549.
28. Kundel HL, Polansky M. Statistical concept series: measurement of observer agreement. Radiology. 2003;228:303-308.
29. Mogelvang J, Lindvig K, Sondergaard L, et al. Reproducibility of cardiac volume measurements including left ventricular mass determined by MRI. Clin Physiol. 1993;13:1011-1019.
30. Pattynama PM, De Roos A, Van der Wall EE, et al. Evaluation of cardiac function with magnetic resonance imaging. Am Heart J. 1994;128:595-607.
31. Sugeng L, Mor-Avi V, Weinert L, et al. Quantitative assessment of left ventricular size and function: side-by-side comparison of real-time three-dimensional echocardiography and computed tomography with magnetic resonance reference. Circulation. 2006;114:654-661.
32. Keenan NG, Pennell DJ. CMR of ventricular function. Echocardiography. 2007;24:185-293.