UNLABELLED: Left Atrial Volume and Function Assessment. INTRODUCTION: In patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing catheter ablation, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can determine left atrial (LA) volume and function before and after ablation. The most accurate, but time consuming, method to determine LA volume is the multiple slice method (MSM), which involves manual tracing of LA area on each slice. The area length method (ALM) offers a simplified, but unvalidated, alternative for LA volume assessment by MRI. The aim of this study was to compare LA volume and function assessment by ALM with MSM. METHODS AND RESULTS: MRI was performed before and after catheter ablation in 40 patients with atrial fibrillation (30 male, mean age 57 years). All patients had sinus rhythm during imaging. In total, 72 MRI scans were available. LA end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (EDV, respectively ESV) were measured by both methods. LA function was determined by calculating LA ejection fraction (EF = (EDV-ESV)/EDV). Measured by ALM, mean LA EDV and ESV were significantly lower than using MSM (102 mL and 49 mL vs 111 mL and 65 mL, respectively, P < 0.001) with a larger difference in mean ESV than EDV (16 mL vs 9 mL). This resulted in an overestimation of LA EF by ALM with a mean of 11% (54% by ALM and 42% by MSM, P < 0.001). ALM correlated well with MSM for LA EDV and ESV (r = 0.77, respectively 0.85), and showed no significant difference in intraobserver and interobserver variability. CONCLUSION: ALM significantly underestimates LA volumes and overestimates LA function, but correlates well with the more accurate MSM.
UNLABELLED: Left Atrial Volume and Function Assessment. INTRODUCTION: In patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing catheter ablation, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can determine left atrial (LA) volume and function before and after ablation. The most accurate, but time consuming, method to determine LA volume is the multiple slice method (MSM), which involves manual tracing of LA area on each slice. The area length method (ALM) offers a simplified, but unvalidated, alternative for LA volume assessment by MRI. The aim of this study was to compare LA volume and function assessment by ALM with MSM. METHODS AND RESULTS: MRI was performed before and after catheter ablation in 40 patients with atrial fibrillation (30 male, mean age 57 years). All patients had sinus rhythm during imaging. In total, 72 MRI scans were available. LA end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (EDV, respectively ESV) were measured by both methods. LA function was determined by calculating LA ejection fraction (EF = (EDV-ESV)/EDV). Measured by ALM, mean LA EDV and ESV were significantly lower than using MSM (102 mL and 49 mL vs 111 mL and 65 mL, respectively, P < 0.001) with a larger difference in mean ESV than EDV (16 mL vs 9 mL). This resulted in an overestimation of LA EF by ALM with a mean of 11% (54% by ALM and 42% by MSM, P < 0.001). ALM correlated well with MSM for LA EDV and ESV (r = 0.77, respectively 0.85), and showed no significant difference in intraobserver and interobserver variability. CONCLUSION: ALM significantly underestimates LA volumes and overestimates LA function, but correlates well with the more accurate MSM.
Authors: Kai Muellerleile; Michael Groth; Dennis Saring; Daniel Steven; Arian Sultan; Imke Drewitz; Boris Hoffmann; Jakob Lueker; Gerhard Adam; Gunnar K Lund; Stephan Willems; Thomas Rostock Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Brendan N Putko; Haran Yogasundaram; Kelvin Chow; Joseph Pagano; Aneal Khan; D Ian Paterson; Richard B Thompson; Gavin Y Oudit Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-03-06 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Laura Kristin Wandelt; Johannes Tammo Kowallick; Andreas Schuster; Rolf Wachter; Thomas Stümpfig; Christina Unterberg-Buchwald; Michael Steinmetz; Christian Oliver Ritter; Joachim Lotz; Wieland Staab Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Karl Heinz Kuck; Riccardo Cappato; Josep Brugada; A John Camm; Shih-Ann Chen; Harry J G Crijns; Ralph J Damiano; D Wyn Davies; John DiMarco; James Edgerton; Kenneth Ellenbogen; Michael D Ezekowitz; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Gerhard Hindricks; Yoshito Iesaka; Warren Jackman; Jose Jalife; Pierre Jais; Jonathan Kalman; David Keane; Young-Hoon Kim; Paulus Kirchhof; George Klein; Hans Kottkamp; Koichiro Kumagai; Bruce D Lindsay; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Patrick M McCarthy; J Lluis Mont; Fred Morady; Koonlawee Nademanee; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Douglas L Packer; Carlo Pappone; Eric Prystowsky; Antonio Raviele; Vivek Reddy; Jeremy N Ruskin; Richard J Shemin; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; David Wilber Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Felix Ceelen; Ross J Hunter; Redha Boubertakh; Wieland H Sommer; Marco Armbruster; Richard J Schilling; Steffen E Petersen Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2013-09-04 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Irene E Hof; Evert-Jan Vonken; Birgitta K Velthuis; Fred H Wittkampf; Jeroen F van der Heijden; Kars G Neven; Wil Kassenberg; Mathias Meine; Maarten J Cramer; Richard N Hauer; Peter Loh Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2013-12-07 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Jan M Sohns; Christina Rosenberg; Antonia Zapf; Christina Unterberg-Buchwald; Wieland Staab; Andreas Schuster; Johannes T Kowallick; Olga Hösch; Thuy-Trang Nguyen; Martin Fasshauer; Thomas Paul; Joachim Lotz; Michael Steinmetz Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2015-04-11 Impact factor: 1.655
Authors: Timothy M Markman; Mohammadali Habibi; Bharath Ambale Venkatesh; Mytra Zareian; Colin Wu; Susan R Heckbert; David A Bluemke; Joao A C Lima Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Johannes Siebermair; Eugene G Kholmovski; Douglas Sheffer; Joyce Schroeder; Leif Jensen; Mobin Kheirkhahan; Alex A Baher; Majd M Ibrahim; Theresa Reiter; Tienush Rassaf; Reza Wakili; Nassir F Marrouche; Christopher J McGann; Brent D Wilson Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-06-11 Impact factor: 3.629