AIM: So far different approaches have been used to quantify late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), but there is no general consensus on the gold standard, since histological data are scarce. The aim of our study was to investigate whether the determination of LGE in patients with HCM using a semiquantitative score based on the 17-segment model is feasible and has comparable accuracy to manual planimetry. METHODS: Forty-two patients with HCM underwent LGE cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. Determination of LGE by planimetry based on visual assessment was used as reference standard. Then the extent of LGE was assessed using a semiquantitative score based on the standard left ventricular 17-segment model. Each segment was scored for the distribution of LGE. The resulting summed score expressed as percentage of the maximum possible score was thereafter compared with the manual planimetric evaluation of LGE, expressed as a percentage of the left ventricular myocardial area. RESULTS: In 28 patients (66%), LGE was present. There was a good correlation between the semiquantitative score and the planimetric approach (r=0.89; y=0.819x+2.45; standard error of estimation=2.327; P<.0001). Additionally, the Bland-Altmann plot showed a high concordance between the two approaches (mean of the difference +1.7%). The inter- and intraobserver limits of agreement and the coefficients of repeatability based on measurements with the semiquantitative score of the extent of LGE were superior to planimetric measurements. Besides, the time requirement for the LGE determination using the semiquantitative score was found to be significantly reduced compared to manual planimetry (median 2 vs. 10 min). CONCLUSIONS: Thus, a reliable global index of the size of the LGE is feasible and can easily be obtained from visual assessment with a semiquantitative score of the extent of the hyperenhancement. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
AIM: So far different approaches have been used to quantify late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), but there is no general consensus on the gold standard, since histological data are scarce. The aim of our study was to investigate whether the determination of LGE in patients with HCM using a semiquantitative score based on the 17-segment model is feasible and has comparable accuracy to manual planimetry. METHODS: Forty-two patients with HCM underwent LGE cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. Determination of LGE by planimetry based on visual assessment was used as reference standard. Then the extent of LGE was assessed using a semiquantitative score based on the standard left ventricular 17-segment model. Each segment was scored for the distribution of LGE. The resulting summed score expressed as percentage of the maximum possible score was thereafter compared with the manual planimetric evaluation of LGE, expressed as a percentage of the left ventricular myocardial area. RESULTS: In 28 patients (66%), LGE was present. There was a good correlation between the semiquantitative score and the planimetric approach (r=0.89; y=0.819x+2.45; standard error of estimation=2.327; P<.0001). Additionally, the Bland-Altmann plot showed a high concordance between the two approaches (mean of the difference +1.7%). The inter- and intraobserver limits of agreement and the coefficients of repeatability based on measurements with the semiquantitative score of the extent of LGE were superior to planimetric measurements. Besides, the time requirement for the LGE determination using the semiquantitative score was found to be significantly reduced compared to manual planimetry (median 2 vs. 10 min). CONCLUSIONS: Thus, a reliable global index of the size of the LGE is feasible and can easily be obtained from visual assessment with a semiquantitative score of the extent of the hyperenhancement. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Robert J H Miller; Louise Thomson; Ryan Levine; Sadia J Dimbil; Jignesh Patel; Jon A Kobashigawa; Evan Kransdorf; Debiao Li; Daniel S Berman; Balaji Tamarappoo Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2019-09-25 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Nathan Mewton; Chia Ying Liu; Pierre Croisille; David Bluemke; João A C Lima Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: D H Frank Gommans; G Etienne Cramer; Jeannette Bakker; Hendrik-Jan Dieker; Michelle Michels; Michael A Fouraux; Carlo L M Marcelis; Freek W A Verheugt; Janneke Timmermans; Marc A Brouwer; Marcel J M Kofflard Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-10-23 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Christina Doesch; Erol Tülümen; Ibrahim Akin; Boris Rudic; Juergen Kuschyk; Ibrahim El-Battrawy; Tobias Becher; Johannes Budjan; Arman Smakic; Stefan O Schoenberg; Martin Borggrefe; Theano Papavassiliu Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-07-24 Impact factor: 4.379