Roya Kamali1,2,3, Joyce Schroeder4, Edward DiBella4, Benjamin Steinberg2, Frederick Han2, Derek J Dosdall1,2,3,5, Rob S Macleod1,3, Ravi Ranjan1,2,3. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 2. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 3. Nora Eccles Harrison Cardiovascular Research and Training Institute, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be used to detect postablation atrial scar (PAAS) but its reproducibility and reliability in clinical scans across different magnetic flux densities and scar detection methods are unknown. METHODS: Patients (n = 45) having undergone two consecutive MRIs (3 months apart) on 3T and 1.5T scanners were studied. We compared PAAS detection reproducibility using four methods of thresholding: simple thresholding, Otsu thresholding, 3.3 standard deviations (SD) above blood pool (BP) mean intensity, and image intensity ratio (IIR). We performed a texture study by dividing the left atrial wall intensity histogram into deciles and evaluated the correlation of the same decile of the two scans as well as to a randomized distribution of intensities, quantified using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC). RESULTS: The choice of scanner did not significantly affect the reproducibility. The scar detection performed by Otsu thresholding (DSC of 71.26 ± 8.34) resulted in a better correlation of the two scans compared with the methods of 3.3 SD above BP mean intensity (DSC of 57.78 ± 21.2, p < .001) and IIR above 1.61 (DSC of 45.76 ± 29.55, p <.001). Texture analysis showed that correlation only for voxels with intensities in deciles above the 70th percentile of wall intensity histogram was better than random distribution (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that clinical LGE-MRI can be reliably used for visualizing PAAS across different magnetic flux densities if the threshold is greater than 70th percentile of the wall intensity distribution. Also, atrial wall-based thresholding is better than BP-based thresholding for reproducible PAAS detection.
INTRODUCTION: Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be used to detect postablation atrial scar (PAAS) but its reproducibility and reliability in clinical scans across different magnetic flux densities and scar detection methods are unknown. METHODS: Patients (n = 45) having undergone two consecutive MRIs (3 months apart) on 3T and 1.5T scanners were studied. We compared PAAS detection reproducibility using four methods of thresholding: simple thresholding, Otsu thresholding, 3.3 standard deviations (SD) above blood pool (BP) mean intensity, and image intensity ratio (IIR). We performed a texture study by dividing the left atrial wall intensity histogram into deciles and evaluated the correlation of the same decile of the two scans as well as to a randomized distribution of intensities, quantified using Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC). RESULTS: The choice of scanner did not significantly affect the reproducibility. The scar detection performed by Otsu thresholding (DSC of 71.26 ± 8.34) resulted in a better correlation of the two scans compared with the methods of 3.3 SD above BP mean intensity (DSC of 57.78 ± 21.2, p < .001) and IIR above 1.61 (DSC of 45.76 ± 29.55, p <.001). Texture analysis showed that correlation only for voxels with intensities in deciles above the 70th percentile of wall intensity histogram was better than random distribution (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that clinical LGE-MRI can be reliably used for visualizing PAAS across different magnetic flux densities if the threshold is greater than 70th percentile of the wall intensity distribution. Also, atrial wall-based thresholding is better than BP-based thresholding for reproducible PAAS detection.
Authors: Martin Rajchl; Jing Yuan; James A White; Eranga Ukwatta; John Stirrat; Cyrus M S Nambakhsh; Feng P Li; Terry M Peters Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2013-09-20 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Nina Ajmone Marsan; Laurens F Tops; Eduard R Holman; Nico R Van de Veire; Katja Zeppenfeld; Eric Boersma; Ernst E van der Wall; Martin J Schalij; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2008-07-18 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Qian Tao; Julien Milles; Katja Zeppenfeld; Hildo J Lamb; Jeroen J Bax; Johan H C Reiber; Rob J van der Geest Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jason E Taclas; Reza Nezafat; John V Wylie; Mark E Josephson; Jeff Hsing; Warren J Manning; Dana C Peters Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2009-12-13 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Atul Verma; Fethi Kilicaslan; Ennio Pisano; Nassir F Marrouche; Raffaele Fanelli; Johannes Brachmann; Jens Geunther; Domenico Potenza; David O Martin; Jennifer Cummings; J David Burkhardt; Walid Saliba; Robert A Schweikert; Andrea Natale Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-08-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Troy J Badger; Robert S Oakes; Marcos Daccarett; Nathan S Burgon; Nazem Akoum; Eric N Fish; Joshua J E Blauer; Swati N Rao; Yaw Adjei-Poku; Eugene G Kholmovski; Sathya Vijayakumar; Edward V R Di Bella; Rob S MacLeod; Nassir F Marrouche Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2008-11-06 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Dana C Peters; John V Wylie; Thomas H Hauser; Kraig V Kissinger; René M Botnar; Vidal Essebag; Mark E Josephson; Warren J Manning Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Robert S Oakes; Troy J Badger; Eugene G Kholmovski; Nazem Akoum; Nathan S Burgon; Eric N Fish; Joshua J E Blauer; Swati N Rao; Edward V R DiBella; Nathan M Segerson; Marcos Daccarett; Jessiciah Windfelder; Christopher J McGann; Dennis Parker; Rob S MacLeod; Nassir F Marrouche Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-03-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: James L Harrison; Henrik K Jensen; Sarah A Peel; Amedeo Chiribiri; Anne K Grøndal; Lars Ø Bloch; Steen F Pedersen; Jacob F Bentzon; Christoph Kolbitsch; Rashed Karim; Steven E Williams; Nick W Linton; Kawal S Rhode; Jaswinder Gill; Michael Cooklin; C A Rinaldi; Matthew Wright; Won Y Kim; Tobias Schaeffter; Reza S Razavi; Mark D O'Neill Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2014-01-12 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Luuk H G A Hopman; Pranav Bhagirath; Mark J Mulder; Iris N Eggink; Albert C van Rossum; Cornelis P Allaart; Marco J W Götte Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2022-08-22 Impact factor: 9.130