Literature DB >> 22561021

Assessment of left ventricular parameters in orthotopic heart transplant recipients using dual-source CT and contrast-enhanced echocardiography: comparison with MRI.

Maria Arraiza1, Pedro M Azcárate, Carlo Nicola De Cecco, Guillermo Viteri, Isabel Simón-Yarza, Rafael Hernández-Estefanía, Gregorio Rábago, Gorka Bastarrika.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To establish the accuracy and reliability of cardiac dual-source CT (DSCT) and two-dimensional contrast-enhanced echocardiography (CE-Echo) in estimating left ventricular (LV) parameters with respect to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) as the reference standard.
METHODS: Twenty-five consecutive heart transplant recipients (20 male, mean age 62.7±10.4 years, mean time since transplantation 8.1±5.9 years) were prospectively recruited. Two blinded readers independently assessed LV ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), and stroke volume (SV) for each patient after manual tracing of the endo- and epicardial contours in DSCT, CE-Echo and CMR cine images. Student's t-test for paired samples for differences, and Bland and Altman plots and Lin's concordance-correlation coefficients (CCC) for agreement were calculated.
RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between left ventricular parameters determined by DSCT and CMR. CE-Echo resulted in significant underestimation of left ventricular volumes (mean difference EDV: 15.94±14.19 ml and 17.1±17.06 ml, ESV: 8.5±9.3 and 7.32±9.14 ml with respect to DSCT and CMR), and overestimation of EF compared with the cross-sectional imaging modalities (3.78±8.47% and 2.14±8.35% with respect to DSCT and CMR). Concordance correlation coefficients for LV parameters using DSCT and CMR were higher (CCC≥0.75) than CCC values observed between CE-Echo and DSCT- or CMR-derived data (CCC≥0.54 and CCC≥0.49, respectively). Interobserver agreement was higher for DSCT and CMR values (CCC≥0.72 and CCC≥0.87, respectively).
CONCLUSION: In orthotopic heart transplantation cardiac DSCT allows accurate and reliable estimation of LV parameters compared with CMR, whereas CE-Echo seems to be insufficient to obtain precise measurements.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22561021     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.04.001

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


  6 in total

1.  Dose levels and image quality of second-generation 128-slice dual-source coronary CT angiography in clinical routine.

Authors:  Julian L Wichmann; Xiaohan Hu; Alexander Engler; J Matthias Kerl; Martin Beeres; Claudia Frellesen; Wolfgang Luboldt; Thomas J Vogl; Ralf W Bauer; Thomas Lehnert
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2015-05-16       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Performance of Automated Software in the Assessment of Segmental Left Ventricular Function in Cardiac CT: Comparison with Cardiac Magnetic Resonance.

Authors:  Rui Wang; Felix G Meinel; U Joseph Schoepf; Christian Canstein; James V Spearman; Carlo N De Cecco
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-04-30       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Multi-modal imaging of the pediatric heart transplant recipient.

Authors:  Jonathan H Soslow; Margaret M Samyn
Journal:  Transl Pediatr       Date:  2019-10

Review 4.  Analysis of ventricular function by CT.

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

Review 5.  Role of CT in the Pre- and Postoperative Assessment of Conotruncal Anomalies.

Authors:  Parveen Kumar; Mona Bhatia
Journal:  Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging       Date:  2022-06-30

6.  Diagnostic performance of late gadolinium enhancement in the assessment of acute cellular rejection after heart transplantation.

Authors:  Evrim Şimşek; Sanem Nalbantgil; Naim Ceylan; Mehdi Zoghi; Hatice Soner Kemal; Çağatay Engin; Tahir Yağdı; Mustafa Özbaran
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 1.596

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.