Literature DB >> 33454899

Inter-vendor variability in strain measurements depends on software rather than image characteristics.

Serkan Ünlü1,2, Oana Mirea1,3, Stéphanie Bézy1, Jürgen Duchenne1, Efstathios D Pagourelias1,4, Jan Bogaert5, James D Thomas6, Luigi P Badano7, Jens-Uwe Voigt8.   

Abstract

Despite standardization efforts, vendors still use specific proprietary software algorithms for echocardiographic strain measurements, which result in high inter-vendor variability. Using vendor-independent software could be one solution. Little is known, however, how vendor specific image characteristics can influence tracking results of such software. We therefore investigated the reproducibility, accuracy, and scar detection ability of strain measurements on images from different vendors by using a vendor-independent software. A vendor-independent software (TomTec Image Arena) was used to analyse datasets of 63 patients which were obtained on machines from four different ultrasound machine vendors (GE, Philips, Siemens, Toshiba). We measured the tracking feasibility, inter-vendor bias, the relative test-re-test variability and scar discrimination ability of strain measurements. Cardiac magnetic resonance delayed enhancement images were used as the reference standard of scar definition. Tracking feasibility on vendor datasets were significantly different (p < 0.001). Variability of global longitudinal strain (GLS) measurements was similar among the vendors whereas variability of segmental longitudinal strain (SLS) showed modest difference. Relative test-re-test variability of GLS and SLS showed no relevant differences. No significant difference in scar detection capability was observed. Average GLS and SLS values were similar among vendors. Reproducibility of GLS measurements showed no difference among vendors and was in acceptable range. SLS reproducibility was high but similar for all vendors. No relevant difference was found for identifying regional dysfunction. Tracking feasibility showed a substantial difference among images from different vendors. Our findings demonstrate that tracking results depend mainly on the software used and show little influence from vendor specific image characteristics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Independent; Reproducibility; Strain; Variability; Vendor

Year:  2021        PMID: 33454899     DOI: 10.1007/s10554-020-02155-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1569-5794            Impact factor:   2.357


  9 in total

1.  Impact of apical foreshortening on deformation measurements: a report from the EACVI-ASE Strain Standardization Task Force.

Authors:  Serkan Ünlü; Jürgen Duchenne; Oana Mirea; Efstathios D Pagourelias; Stéphanie Bézy; Marta Cvijic; Ahmed Salem Beela; James D Thomas; Luigi P Badano; Jens-Uwe Voigt
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-03-01       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  Definitions for a common standard for 2D speckle tracking echocardiography: consensus document of the EACVI/ASE/Industry Task Force to standardize deformation imaging.

Authors:  Jens-Uwe Voigt; Gianni Pedrizzetti; Peter Lysyansky; Tom H Marwick; Hélène Houle; Rolf Baumann; Stefano Pedri; Yasuhiro Ito; Yasuhiko Abe; Stephen Metz; Joo Hyun Song; Jamie Hamilton; Partho P Sengupta; Theodore J Kolias; Jan d'Hooge; Gerard P Aurigemma; James D Thomas; Luigi Paolo Badano
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 5.251

3.  Intervendor variability of two-dimensional strain using vendor-specific and vendor-independent software.

Authors:  Yasufumi Nagata; Masaaki Takeuchi; Kei Mizukoshi; Victor Chien-Chia Wu; Fen-Chiung Lin; Kazuaki Negishi; Satoshi Nakatani; Yutaka Otsuji
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 5.251

Review 4.  Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging.

Authors:  Roberto M Lang; Luigi P Badano; Victor Mor-Avi; Jonathan Afilalo; Anderson Armstrong; Laura Ernande; Frank A Flachskampf; Elyse Foster; Steven A Goldstein; Tatiana Kuznetsova; Patrizio Lancellotti; Denisa Muraru; Michael H Picard; Ernst R Rietzschel; Lawrence Rudski; Kirk T Spencer; Wendy Tsang; Jens-Uwe Voigt
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  Variability and Reproducibility of Segmental Longitudinal Strain Measurement: A Report From the EACVI-ASE Strain Standardization Task Force.

Authors:  Oana Mirea; Efstathios D Pagourelias; Jurgen Duchenne; Jan Bogaert; James D Thomas; Luigi P Badano; Jens-Uwe Voigt
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-05-17

6.  Comparison of Feasibility, Accuracy, and Reproducibility of Layer-Specific Global Longitudinal Strain Measurements Among Five Different Vendors: A Report from the EACVI-ASE Strain Standardization Task Force.

Authors:  Serkan Ünlü; Oana Mirea; Jürgen Duchenne; Efstathios D Pagourelias; Stéphanie Bézy; James D Thomas; Luigi P Badano; Jens-Uwe Voigt
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 5.251

7.  Intervendor Differences in the Accuracy of Detecting Regional Functional Abnormalities: A Report From the EACVI-ASE Strain Standardization Task Force.

Authors:  Oana Mirea; Efstathios D Pagourelias; Jurgen Duchenne; Jan Bogaert; James D Thomas; Luigi P Badano; Jens-Uwe Voigt
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-05-17

8.  Head-to-Head Comparison of Global Longitudinal Strain Measurements among Nine Different Vendors: The EACVI/ASE Inter-Vendor Comparison Study.

Authors:  Konstantinos E Farsalinos; Ana M Daraban; Serkan Ünlü; James D Thomas; Luigi P Badano; Jens-Uwe Voigt
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 5.251

Review 9.  Standardization of adult transthoracic echocardiography reporting in agreement with recent chamber quantification, diastolic function, and heart valve disease recommendations: an expert consensus document of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging.

Authors:  Maurizio Galderisi; Bernard Cosyns; Thor Edvardsen; Nuno Cardim; Victoria Delgado; Giovanni Di Salvo; Erwan Donal; Leyla Elif Sade; Laura Ernande; Madalina Garbi; Julia Grapsa; Andreas Hagendorff; Otto Kamp; Julien Magne; Ciro Santoro; Alexandros Stefanidis; Patrizio Lancellotti; Bogdan Popescu; Gilbert Habib
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 6.875

  9 in total
  2 in total

1.  Editor's Note.

Authors:  Johan H C Reiber
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2021-05       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 2.  Herceptin-Mediated Cardiotoxicity: Assessment by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.

Authors:  Jin Jiang; Boyang Liu; Sandeep S Hothi
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2022-02-27       Impact factor: 1.866

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.