Literature DB >> 17466480

Assessment of global and regional left ventricular function using 64-slice multislice computed tomography and 2D echocardiography: a comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance.

Bin Rapaee Annuar1, Chee Khoon Liew, Sze Piaw Chin, Tiong Kiam Ong, M Tobias Seyfarth, Wei Ling Chan, Yean Yip Fong, Choon Kiat Ang, Naing Lin, Houng Bang Liew, Kui Hian Sim.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the assessment of global and regional left ventricular (LV) function using 64-slice multislice computed tomography (MSCT), 2D echocardiography (2DE) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).
METHODS: Thirty-two consecutive patients (mean age, 56.5+/-9.7 years) referred for evaluation of coronary artery using 64-slice MSCT also underwent 2DE and CMR within 48h. The global left ventricular function which include left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVdV) and left ventricular end systolic volume (LVsV) were determine using the three modalities. Regional wall motion (RWM) was assessed visually in all three modalities. The CMR served as the gold standard for the comparison between 64-slice MSCT with CMR and 2DE with CMR. Statistical analysis included Pearson correlation coefficient, Bland-Altman plots and kappa-statistics.
RESULTS: The 64-slice MSCT agreed well with CMR for assessment of LVEF (r=0.92; p<0.0001), LVdV (r=0.98; p<0.0001) and LVsV (r=0.98; p<0.0001). In comparison with 64-slice MSCT, 2DE showed moderate correlation with CMR for the assessment of LVEF (r=0.84; p<0.0001), LVdV (r=0.83; p<0.0001) and LVsV (r=0.80; p<0.0001). However in RWM analysis, 2DE showed better accuracy than 64-slice MSCT (94.3% versus 82.4%) and closer agreement (kappa=0.89 versus 0.63) with CMR.
CONCLUSION: 64-Slice MSCT correlates strongly with CMR in global LV function however in regional LV function 2DE showed better agreement with CMR than 64-slice MSCT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17466480     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.03.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  9 in total

1.  Automatic vs semi-automatic global cardiac function assessment using 64-row CT.

Authors:  J Greupner; E Zimmermann; B Hamm; M Dewey
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Incremental diagnostic value of regional left ventricular function over coronary assessment by cardiac computed tomography for the detection of acute coronary syndrome in patients with acute chest pain: from the ROMICAT trial.

Authors:  Sujith K Seneviratne; Quynh A Truong; Fabian Bamberg; Ian S Rogers; Michael D Shapiro; Christopher L Schlett; Claudia U Chae; Ricardo Cury; Suhny Abbara; Thomas J Brady; John T Nagurney; Udo Hoffmann
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 7.792

3.  Feasibility of a radiation dose conserving CT protocol for myocardial function assessment.

Authors:  A Pursnani; A Lee; T Mayrhofer; M Panagia; U Sharma; S Abbara; U Hoffmann; B B Ghoshhajra
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-06-02       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Regional Strain Analysis with Multidetector CT in a Swine Cardiomyopathy Model: Relationship to Cardiac MR Tagging and Myocardial Fibrosis.

Authors:  Michael W Tee; Samuel Won; Fabio S Raman; Colin Yi; Davis M Vigneault; Cynthia Davies-Venn; Songtao Liu; Albert C Lardo; João A C Lima; J Alison Noble; Craig A Emter; David A Bluemke
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  CT for evaluation of myocardial cell therapy in heart failure: a comparison with CMR imaging.

Authors:  Karl H Schuleri; Marco Centola; Seong Hoon Choi; Kristine S Evers; Fady Dawoud; Richard T George; João A C Lima; Albert C Lardo
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2011-12

6.  Contrast Enhancement of the Right Ventricle during Coronary CT Angiography--Is It Necessary?

Authors:  Madeleine Kok; Bas L J H Kietselaer; Casper Mihl; Sibel Altintas; Estelle C Nijssen; Joachim E Wildberger; Marco Das
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes: it depends on the imaging method.

Authors:  Peter W Wood; Jonathan B Choy; Navin C Nanda; Harald Becher
Journal:  Echocardiography       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 1.724

8.  Assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction in patients eligible for ICD therapy: Discrepancy between cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and 2D echocardiography.

Authors:  S de Haan; K de Boer; J Commandeur; A M Beek; A C van Rossum; C P Allaart
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.380

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

Authors:  Bedia Kara; Alaaddin Nayman; Ibrahim Guler; Enes Elvin Gul; Mustafa Koplay; Yahya Paksoy
Journal:  Pol J Radiol       Date:  2016-03-09
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.