Left and right ventricle assessment with Cardiac CT: Validation study vs. Cardiac MR

European Radiology

Volumn 22, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1041-1049

  Maffei, Erica ^a   Messalli, Giancarlo ^b   Martini, Chiara ^a,c   Nieman, Koen ^c   Catalano, Onofrio ^b   Rossi, Alexia ^c   Seitun, Sara ^a   Guaricci, Andrea I ^d   Tedeschi, Carlo ^e   Mollet, Nico R ^c   Cademartiri, Filippo ^a,c  

^a Giovanni XXIII Hospital   (Italy)

^b IRCCS SDN   (Italy)

^c ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF FOGGIA   (Italy)

^e San Gennaro Hospital   (Italy)

Author keywords

Cardiac computed tomography; Cardiac magnetic resonance; Ejection fraction; Left ventricle assessment; Right ventricle assessment

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM EXAMINATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; FEMALE; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE EJECTION FRACTION; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE ENDDIASTOLIC VOLUME; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE ENDSYSTOLIC VOLUME; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HEART RATE; HEART RIGHT VENTRICLE EJECTION FRACTION; HEART RIGHT VENTRICLE ENDDIASTOLIC VOLUME; HEART RIGHT VENTRICLE ENDSYSTOLIC VOLUME; HEART RIGHT VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; SINUS RHYTHM; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, CINE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; VENTRICULAR DYSFUNCTION, LEFT; VENTRICULAR DYSFUNCTION, RIGHT; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84861518186     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: 14321084     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-011-2345-6     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E, Moyé LA et al (1992) Effect of captopril on mortality and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction: results of the survival and ventricular enlargement trial. N Engl J Med 327:669-677
2. Moise A, Bourassa MG, Theroux P et al (1985) Prognostic significance of progression of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 55:941-946 (Pubitemid 15085340)
3. Emond M, Mock MB, Davis KB et al (1994) Long-term survival of medically treated patients in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry. Circulation 90:2645-2657
4. Juergens KU, Fischbach R (2006) Left ventricular function studied with MDCT. Eur Radiol 16:342-357 (Pubitemid 43153682)
5. de Feyter PJ, van Eenige MJ, Dighton DH et al (1982) Prognostic value of exercise testing, coronary angiography and left ventriculography 6-8 weeks after myocardial infarction. Circulation 66:527-536 (Pubitemid 12038574)
6. Taylor GJ, Humphries JO, Mellits ED et al (1980) Predictors of clinical course, coronary anatomy and left ventricular function after recovery from acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 62:960-970 (Pubitemid 11225961)
7. White HD, Norris RM, Brown MA et al (1987) Left ventricular end-systolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction. Circulation 76:44-51 (Pubitemid 17093191)
8. Peshock RM, Willett DL, Sayad DE et al (1996) Quantitative MR imaging of the heart. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 4:287-305 (Pubitemid 26153167)
9. Rathi VK, Biedermann RW (2004) Imaging of ventricular function by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Curr Cardiol Rep 6:55-61 (Pubitemid 38915018)
10. Alfakih K, Plein S, Thiele H et al (2003) Normal human left and right ventricular dimensions for MRI as assessed by turbo gradient echo and steady-state free precession imaging sequences. J Magn Reson Imaging 17:323-329 (Pubitemid 36259246)
11. Thiele H, Nagel E, Paetsch I et al (2001) Functional cardiac MR imaging with steady-state free precession (SSFP) significantly improves endocardial border delineation without contrast agents. J Magn Reson Imaging 14:362-367 (Pubitemid 32906553)
12. Barkhausen J, Ruehm SG, Goyen M et al (2001) MR evaluation of ventricular function: true fast imaging with steadystate precession versus fast low-angle shot cine MR imaging: feasibility study. Radiology 219:264-269 (Pubitemid 32234085)
13. Moon JCC, Lorenz CH, Francis JM et al (2002) Breath-hold FLASH and FISP cardiovascular MR imaging: left ventricular volume differences and reproducibility. Radiology 223:789-797 (Pubitemid 34547599)
14. Palumbo A, Maffei E, Martini C et al (2010) Functional parameters of the left ventricle: comparison of cardiac MRI and cardiac CT in a large population. Radiol Med 115:702-713
15. Maffei E, Messalli G, Palumbo A et al (2010) Left ventricular ejection fraction: real-world comparison between cardiac computed tomography and echocardiography in a large population. Radiol Med 115:1015-1027
16. Lembcke A, Dohmen PM, Dewey M et al (2005) Multislice computed tomography for preoperative evaluation of right ventricular volumes and function: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Thorac Surg 79:1344-1351 (Pubitemid 40431864)
17. Raman SV, Shah M, McCarthy B et al (2006) Multi-detector row cardiac computed tomography accurately quantifies right and left ventricular size and function compared with cardiac magnetic resonance. Am Heart J 151:736-744 (Pubitemid 43290272)
18. Belge B, Coche E, Pasquet A et al (2006) Accurate estimation of global and regional cardiac function by retrospectively gated multidetector row computed tomography. Comparison with cine magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 16:1424-1433 (Pubitemid 43871813)
19. Abbara S, Chowa JWB, Pena AJ et al (2008) Assessment of left ventricular function with 16- and 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 67:481-486
20. Bansal D, Singh RM, Sarkar M et al (2008) Assessment of left ventricular function: comparison of cardiac multidetector-row computed tomography with two-dimension standard echocardiography for assessment of left ventricular function. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 24:317-325
21. Heuschmid M, Rothfuss JK, Schroeder S et al (2006) Assessment of left ventricular myocardial function using 16-slice multidetector-row computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography. Eur Radiol 16:551-559 (Pubitemid 44149366)
22. Sugeng L, Mor-Avi V, Weinert L et al (2006) 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 114:654-661 (Pubitemid 44252307)
23. Wu Y, Tadamura E, Yamamuro M et al (2008) Estimation of global and regional cardiac function using 64-slice computed tomography: a comparison study with echocardiography, gated-SPECT and cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Int J Cardiol 128:69-76 (Pubitemid 351905761)
24. Puesken M, Fischbach R, Wenker M et al (2008) Global leftventricular function assessment using dual-source multidetector CT: effect of improved temporal resolution on ventricular volume measurement. Eur Radiol 18:2087-2094
25. Krishnam MS, Tomasian A, Iv M et al (2008) Left ventricular ejection fraction using 64-slice CT coronary angiography and new evaluation software: initial experience. Br J Radiol 81:450-455 (Pubitemid 351957755)
26. Busch S, Johnson TRC, Wintersperger BJ et al (2008) Quantitative assessment of left ventricular function with dual-source CT in comparison to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: initial findings. Eur Radiol 18:570-575 (Pubitemid 351248185)
27. Brodoefel H, Reimann A, Klumpp B et al (2007) Sixty-four-slice CT in the assessment of global and regional left ventricular function: Comparison with MRI in a porcine model of acute and subacute myocardial infarction. Eur Radiol 17:2948-2956 (Pubitemid 47603992)
28. Caudron J, Fares J, Vivier PH et al (2011) Diagnostic accuracy and variability of three semi-quantitative methods for assessing right ventricular systolic function from cardiac MRI in patients with acquired heart disease. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-011-2152-0
29. Guo Y, Gao H, Zhang X et al (2010) Accuracy and reproducibility of assessing right ventricular function with 64-section multidetector row CT Comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Cardiol 139:254-262
30. Plumhans C, Mühlenbruch G, Rapaee A et al (2008) Assessment of global right ventricular function on 64-MDCT compared with MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1358-1361 (Pubitemid 351684901)
31. Koch K, Oellig F, Oberholzer K et al (2005) Assessment of right ventricular function by 16-detector-row CT: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 15:312-318
32. Müller M, Teige F, Schnapauff D et al (2009) Evaluation of right ventricular function with multidetector computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging and analysis of inter- and intraobserver variability. Eur Radiol 19:278-289
33. Levine GN, Gomes AS, Arai AE et al (2007) Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiovascular devices: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization. Circulation 116:2878-2891 (Pubitemid 350291228)
34. Shellock FG, Spinazzi A (2008) MRI safety update: 2008, Part 2, screening patients for MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:12-21
35. Cademartiri F, Romano M, Seitun S et al (2008) Prevalence and characteristics of coronary artery disease in a population with suspected ischaemic heart disease using CT coronary angiography: correlations with cardiovascular risk factors and clinical presentation. Radiol Med 113:363-372 (Pubitemid 351725519)
36. Partridge JB, Anderson RH (2009) Left ventricular anatomy: its nomenclature, segmentation, and planes of imaging. Clin Anat 22:77-84
37. Hergan K, Schuster A, Frühwald J et al (2008) Comparison of left and right ventricular volume measurement using the Simpson's method and the area length method. Eur J Radiol 65:270-278 (Pubitemid 351187962)
38. Lorenz CH, Walker ES, Morgan VL et al (1999) Normal human right and left ventricular mass, systolic function, and gender differences by cine magnetic resonance imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 1:7-21
39. Miller S, Simonetti OP, Carr J et al (2002) MR imaging of the heart with cine true fast imaging with steady-state precession: influence of spatial and temporal resolutions on left ventricular functional parameters. Radiology 223:263-269 (Pubitemid 34258218)
40. van Geuns RJM, Baks T, Gronenschild EHBM et al (2006) Automatic quantitative left ventricular analysis of cine MR images by using three-dimensional information for contour detection. Radiology 240:215-221 (Pubitemid 43902612)
41. Sievers B, Kirchberg S, Bakan A et al (2004) Impact of papillary muscles in ventricular volume and ejection fraction assessment by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 6:9-16 (Pubitemid 38316423)
42. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307-310 (Pubitemid 16134762)
43. Grothues F, Moon JC, Bellenger NG et al (2004) Interstudy reproducibility of right ventricular volumes, function, and mass with cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Am Heart J 147:218-223 (Pubitemid 38176819)
44. Sugeng L, Mor-Avi V, Weinert L et al (2010) Multimodality comparison of quantitative volumetric analysis of the right ventricle. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:10-18
45. Alkadhi H (2009) Radiation dose of cardiac CT-what is the evidence? Eur Radiol 19:1311-1315
46. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M et al (2006) Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation 113:1305-1310 (Pubitemid 43739452)
47. Achenbach S, Anders K, Kalender WA (2008) Dual-source cardiac computed tomography: image quality and dose considerations. Eur Radiol 18:1188-1198
48. Hausleiter J, Martinoff S, Hadamitzky M et al (2010) Image quality and radiation exposure with a low tube voltage protocol for coronary CT angiography results of the PROTECTION II Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:1113-1123
49. Alkadhi H, Leschka S (2011) Radiation dose of cardiac computed tomography - what has been achieved and what needs to be done. Eur Radiol 21:505-509