G Ligabue1, F Fiocchi, S Ferraresi, A Barbieri, R Romagnoli, P Torricelli. 1. Cattedra e Servizio di Radiologia I, Dipartimento Integrato dei Servizi Diagnostici e per Immagini, Università degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico di Modena, Modena, Italy. ligabue.guido@unimore.it
Abstract
PURPOSE: Our aim was to evaluate the reliability of visual quantification of infarct extent on delayed enhanced magnetic resonance images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty patients with previous myocardial infarction underwent cine and contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. The gadolinium-enhanced images were evaluated using a segmental model with two different methods: a visual score on a 5-point scale (0 no hyperenhancement, 4 hyperenhancement>76% of myocardial wall) and a quantitative analysis based on the manual tracing of infarct contours with automatic threshold analysis. Each segment was also assigned a wall-motion score ranging from 0 (normokinesia) to 4 (dyskinesia). Statistical evaluation was performed. RESULTS: Out of 1,280 segments, 322 (25.1%) showed wall-motion abnormalities with enhancement in 327 (25.5%) evaluated with visual score and in 414 (32.3%) quantitatively. Among segments with normal or mild hypokinesia, 89.2% had a delayed-enhancement score<or=1, whereas 80.2% of akinetic or dyskinetic segments had a score>or=3. Mean time required for the visual and quantitative approach was 7+/-3 and 18+/-9 min, respectively. There was strong agreement between the visual and quantitative method (k=0.92; p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Visual analysis of delayed enhancement is a timesaving approach that is sufficient to assess the transmural extent of infarction. Moreover, it has high correlation with wall-motion abnormalities.
PURPOSE: Our aim was to evaluate the reliability of visual quantification of infarct extent on delayed enhanced magnetic resonance images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty patients with previous myocardial infarction underwent cine and contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. The gadolinium-enhanced images were evaluated using a segmental model with two different methods: a visual score on a 5-point scale (0 no hyperenhancement, 4 hyperenhancement>76% of myocardial wall) and a quantitative analysis based on the manual tracing of infarct contours with automatic threshold analysis. Each segment was also assigned a wall-motion score ranging from 0 (normokinesia) to 4 (dyskinesia). Statistical evaluation was performed. RESULTS: Out of 1,280 segments, 322 (25.1%) showed wall-motion abnormalities with enhancement in 327 (25.5%) evaluated with visual score and in 414 (32.3%) quantitatively. Among segments with normal or mild hypokinesia, 89.2% had a delayed-enhancement score<or=1, whereas 80.2% of akinetic or dyskinetic segments had a score>or=3. Mean time required for the visual and quantitative approach was 7+/-3 and 18+/-9 min, respectively. There was strong agreement between the visual and quantitative method (k=0.92; p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Visual analysis of delayed enhancement is a timesaving approach that is sufficient to assess the transmural extent of infarction. Moreover, it has high correlation with wall-motion abnormalities.
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: R J Kim; D S Fieno; T B Parrish; K Harris; E L Chen; O Simonetti; J Bundy; J P Finn; F J Klocke; R M Judd Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-11-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Li-Yueh Hsu; Alex Natanzon; Peter Kellman; Glenn A Hirsch; Anthony H Aletras; Andrew E Arai Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Li-Yueh Hsu; W Patricia Ingkanisorn; Peter Kellman; Anthony H Aletras; Andrew E Arai Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Joanne D Schuijf; Theodorus A M Kaandorp; Hildo J Lamb; Rob J van der Geest; Eric P Viergever; Ernst E van der Wall; Albert de Roos; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2004-08-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: K Ramani; R M Judd; T A Holly; T B Parrish; V H Rigolin; M A Parker; C Callahan; S W Fitzgerald; R O Bonow; F J Klocke Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-12-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: F Fedele; T Montesano; M Ferro-Luzzi; E Di Cesare; P Di Renzi; F Scopinaro; L Agati; M Penco; F Serri; A Vitarelli Journal: Am Heart J Date: 1994-09 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: M Francone; I Carbone; L Agati; C Bucciarelli Ducci; M Mangia; I Iacucci; C Catalano; R Passariello Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2010-10-06 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: F Fiocchi; F Sgura; A Di Girolamo; G Ligabue; S Ferraresi; R Rossi; R D'Amico; M G Modena; P Torricelli Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2009-06-23 Impact factor: 3.469