Rui Wang1, Xinmin Liu2, U Joseph Schoepf3, Marly van Assen4, Imtiaz Alimohamed5, L Parkwood Griffith5, Taiyang Luo2, Zhonghua Sun6, Zhanming Fan1, Lei Xu7. 1. Department of Radiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China. 2. Wards 40 of Cardiology Department, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China. 3. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University or South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA; Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University or South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 4. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University or South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA; Center for Medical Imaging North-East Netherlands (CMI-NEN), University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 5. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University or South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 6. Department of Medical Radiation Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia. 7. Department of Radiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China. Electronic address: leixu2001@aliyun.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUNDS: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 mapping and the extracellular volume (ECV) have been developed to quantitative analysis of diffusely abnormal myocardial fibrosis (MF). However, dual-energy CT (DECT) has a potential for calculation of ECV. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of DECT technique in determining the ECV in patients with heart failure, with 3T CMR as the reference. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with various reasons of heart failure were enrolled in this study. Both DECT and CMR exams were completed within 24 h. ECVs were calculated, and the relationship between DECT-ECV, CMR-ECV, and other heart function parameters, including left ventricular end systolic and diastolic volume, cardiac output and ejection fraction (LVESV, LVEDV, CO, LVEF), Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) was determined. All participants gave informed consent, and the study was approved by the institutional review board. RESULTS: The median ECVs on DECT and CMR were 33% (95%CI: 32%-36%) and 30% (95%CI: 30% - 32%), respectively. A good correlation between myocardial ECV at DECT and that at CMR (r = 0.945, P < 0.001) was observed. Bland-Altman analysis between DECT and CMR showed a small bias (2.6%), with 95% limits of agreement of -0.4% and 5.6%. Interobserver agreement for ECV at DECT was excellent (ICC = 0.907). Both ECVs, for DECT and CMR, were inversely associated with LVEF and CO. CONCLUSION: DECT-based ECV could be an alternative non-invasive imaging tool for myocardial tissue characterization. However, overestimation of the extent of diffuse MF is observed with use of DECT.
BACKGROUNDS: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 mapping and the extracellular volume (ECV) have been developed to quantitative analysis of diffusely abnormal myocardial fibrosis (MF). However, dual-energy CT (DECT) has a potential for calculation of ECV. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of DECT technique in determining the ECV in patients with heart failure, with 3T CMR as the reference. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with various reasons of heart failure were enrolled in this study. Both DECT and CMR exams were completed within 24 h. ECVs were calculated, and the relationship between DECT-ECV, CMR-ECV, and other heart function parameters, including left ventricular end systolic and diastolic volume, cardiac output and ejection fraction (LVESV, LVEDV, CO, LVEF), Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) was determined. All participants gave informed consent, and the study was approved by the institutional review board. RESULTS: The median ECVs on DECT and CMR were 33% (95%CI: 32%-36%) and 30% (95%CI: 30% - 32%), respectively. A good correlation between myocardial ECV at DECT and that at CMR (r = 0.945, P < 0.001) was observed. Bland-Altman analysis between DECT and CMR showed a small bias (2.6%), with 95% limits of agreement of -0.4% and 5.6%. Interobserver agreement for ECV at DECT was excellent (ICC = 0.907). Both ECVs, for DECT and CMR, were inversely associated with LVEF and CO. CONCLUSION: DECT-based ECV could be an alternative non-invasive imaging tool for myocardial tissue characterization. However, overestimation of the extent of diffuse MF is observed with use of DECT.
Authors: Gianluca Pontone; Alexia Rossi; Marco Guglielmo; Marc R Dweck; Oliver Gaemperli; Koen Nieman; Francesca Pugliese; Pal Maurovich-Horvat; Alessia Gimelli; Bernard Cosyns; Stephan Achenbach Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2022-03-22 Impact factor: 9.130
Authors: Serena Dell'Aversana; Raffaele Ascione; Marco De Giorgi; Davide Raffaele De Lucia; Renato Cuocolo; Marco Boccalatte; Gerolamo Sibilio; Giovanni Napolitano; Giuseppe Muscogiuri; Sandro Sironi; Giuseppe Di Costanzo; Enrico Cavaglià; Massimo Imbriaco; Andrea Ponsiglione Journal: J Imaging Date: 2022-09-01