J Greupner1, E Zimmermann, B Hamm, M Dewey. 1. Department of Radiology, Charité - Medical School Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Global cardiac function assessment using multidetector CT (MDCT) is time-consuming. Therefore we sought to compare an automatic software tool with an established semi-automatic method. METHODS: A total of 36 patients underwent CT with 64 × 0.5 mm detector collimation, and global left ventricular function was subsequently assessed by two independent blinded readers using both an automatic region-growing-based software tool (with and without manual adjustment) and an established semi-automatic software tool. We also analysed automatic motion mapping to identify end-systole. RESULTS: The time needed for assessment using the semi-automatic approach (12:12 ± 6:19 min) was reduced by 75-85% with the automatic software tool (unadjusted, 01:34 ± 0:29 min, adjusted, 02:53 ± 1:19 min; both p<0.001). There was good correlation (r=0.89; p<0.001) for the ejection fraction (EF) between the adjusted automatic (58.6 ± 14.9%) and the semi-automatic (58.0 ± 15.3%) approaches. Also the manually adjusted automatic approach led to significantly smaller limits of agreement than the unadjusted automatic approach for end-diastolic volume (±36.4 ml vs ±58.5 ml, p>0.05). Using motion mapping to automatically identify end-systole reduced analysis time by 95% compared with the semi-automatic approach, but showed inferior precision for EF and end-systolic volume. CONCLUSION: Automatic function assessment using MDCT with manual adjustment shows good agreement with an established semi-automatic approach, while reducing the analysis by 75% to less than 3 min. This suggests that automatic CT function assessment with manual correction may be used for fast, comfortable and reliable evaluation of global left ventricular function.
OBJECTIVE: Global cardiac function assessment using multidetector CT (MDCT) is time-consuming. Therefore we sought to compare an automatic software tool with an established semi-automatic method. METHODS: A total of 36 patients underwent CT with 64 × 0.5 mm detector collimation, and global left ventricular function was subsequently assessed by two independent blinded readers using both an automatic region-growing-based software tool (with and without manual adjustment) and an established semi-automatic software tool. We also analysed automatic motion mapping to identify end-systole. RESULTS: The time needed for assessment using the semi-automatic approach (12:12 ± 6:19 min) was reduced by 75-85% with the automatic software tool (unadjusted, 01:34 ± 0:29 min, adjusted, 02:53 ± 1:19 min; both p<0.001). There was good correlation (r=0.89; p<0.001) for the ejection fraction (EF) between the adjusted automatic (58.6 ± 14.9%) and the semi-automatic (58.0 ± 15.3%) approaches. Also the manually adjusted automatic approach led to significantly smaller limits of agreement than the unadjusted automatic approach for end-diastolic volume (±36.4 ml vs ±58.5 ml, p>0.05). Using motion mapping to automatically identify end-systole reduced analysis time by 95% compared with the semi-automatic approach, but showed inferior precision for EF and end-systolic volume. CONCLUSION: Automatic function assessment using MDCT with manual adjustment shows good agreement with an established semi-automatic approach, while reducing the analysis by 75% to less than 3 min. This suggests that automatic CT function assessment with manual correction may be used for fast, comfortable and reliable evaluation of global left ventricular function.
Authors: Kai Uwe Juergens; Matthias Grude; David Maintz; Eva Maria Fallenberg; Thomas Wichter; Walter Heindel; Roman Fischbach Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-12-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Marc Dewey; Mira Müller; Stephan Eddicks; Dirk Schnapauff; Florian Teige; Wolfgang Rutsch; Adrian C Borges; Bernd Hamm Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Georg Mühlenbruch; Marco Das; Christian Hohl; Joachim E Wildberger; Daniel Rinck; Thomas G Flohr; Ralf Koos; Christian Knackstedt; Rolf W Günther; Andreas H Mahnken Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-12-22 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: P A van der Vleuten; T P Willems; M J W Götte; R A Tio; M J W Greuter; F Zijlstra; M Oudkerk Journal: Acta Radiol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 1.990
Authors: Gudrun M Feuchtner; Wolfgang Dichtl; Guy J Friedrich; Mathias Frick; Hannes Alber; Thomas Schachner; Johannes Bonatti; Ammar Mallouhi; Thomas Frede; Otmar Pachinger; Dieter zur Nedden; Silvana Müller Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-03-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Asim Rizvi; Roderick C Deaño; Daniel P Bachman; Guanglei Xiong; James K Min; Quynh A Truong Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2014-11-26