| Literature DB >> 34275477 |
Yousef Arar1,2, Tarique Hussain3,4,5, Riad Abou Zahr3,5, Vasu Gooty3,5, Joshua S Greer3, Rong Huang6, Jennifer Hernandez7, Jamie King3,5, Gerald Greil3,4,5, Surendranath R Veeram Reddy3,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac catheterization and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging have distinct diagnostic roles in the congenital heart disease (CHD) population. Invasive CMR (iCMR) allows for a more thorough assessment of cardiac hemodynamics at the same time under the same conditions. It is assumed but not proven that iCMR gives an incremental value by providing more accurate flow quantification.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac catheterization; Congenital heart disease; Device tracking; Interventional CMR; Magnetic resonance imaging; Reproducibility
Year: 2021 PMID: 34275477 PMCID: PMC8287667 DOI: 10.1186/s12968-021-00784-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Fig. 1Invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance (iCMR) environment and equipment. A CMR team (zone 3) adjusting images with direct visualization of the interventionalist performing the iCMR procedure. B Depiction of sterile draping within the iCMR environment. C Interventionalist equipment includes an MR-conditional catheter and guidewire. The FDA cleared and CE marked guidewire has three passive markers, coated with nanoparticles, that produces a distinct susceptibility artifact (0 mm, 20 mm, and 40 mm from the tip). D Interventionalist performing an iCMR procedure (zone 4) with real-time CMR guidance on adjacent projector screen (E)
Fig. 2Test–retest catheter-based Fick and CMR-based flow reliability. A series of two conditions were performed to evaluate intra- and inter-rater reliability between catheter-based Fick and CMR-derived flow hemodynamics. The first condition was baseline catheter-based Fick (right heart catheterization (RHC)/left heart catherization (LHC)) and CMR-based flow (pulmonic flow (Qp)/systemic flow (Qs)) measurements. The second condition was repeat measurement under the same conditions (Cath: RHC/LHC + CMR: Qp/Qs flows). Dashed white arrow – Gadolinium-filled balloon; Solid white arrow – MR-conditional guidewire; Blue line –CMR flow vector
Fig. 3Basic subject demographics. (CoA = Coarctation of the aorta; PH = Pulmonary hypertension; iNO = Inhaled Nitric Oxide; TOF = tetralogy of Fallot; PA = Pulmonary artery; OHT = Orthotopic heart transplantation)
Fig. 4Summary of basic iCMR hemodynamics. Comparison of mean and standard deviation (std dev) measurements for catheterization and CMR hemodynamics for condition 1 (C1) and condition 2 (C2). Qp = Pulmonary blood flow; Qs = Systemic blood flow
Fig. 5iCMR intra-rater reliability testing. Bland–Altman plots depicting Pearson correlation coefficients (PCC) to measure test–retest reliability testing between conditions 1 (C1) and 2 (C2) for catheter-based Fick hemodynamics for (A) Qp (B) Qs and CMR-derived flow hemodynamics for (C) Qp and (D) Qs. Qp = Pulmonary blood flow; Qs = Systemic blood flow
Fig. 6iCMR inter-rater reliability testing. Bland–Altman plots depicting concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) to measure agreement between catheter-based Fick and CMR-derived flow hemodynamics in condition 1 (C1) and condition 2 (C2) for (A) Qp and (B) Qs. Qp = Pulmonary blood flow; Qs = Systemic blood flow
Fig. 7iCMR flow scatter plots. Comparison of Cath vs CMR blood flow measurements for (A) Qp and (B) Qs. Subjects are grouped based on their underlying anatomy (single ventricle and biventricular). C1 and C2 for each subject is connected by a black line. The dashed line represents an ideal linear relationship. The subjects where VO2 was assumed are outlined in red. Qp = Pulmonary blood flow; Qs = Systemic blood flow; SV = Single ventricle; BV = Biventricular; C1 = Condition 1; C2 = Condition 2; VO2 = Oxygen consumption
iCMR coefficient of determination
| Linear regression model n = 29 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X = Cath C1 | X = CMR C1 | X = CMR C1 | X = CMR C2 | |||||
| Y = Cath C2 | Y = CMR C2 | Y = Cath C1 | Y = Cath C2 | |||||
| Qp | 0.86x + 0.51 | 0.80 | 0.79x + 0.69 | 0.92 | 0.50x + 1.32 | 0.51 | 0.65x + 0.36 | 0.65 |
| Qs | 0.94x + 0.54 | 0.39 | 1.09x− 0.23 | 0.88 | 0.22x + 2.39 | 0.05 | 0.62x + 1.34 | 0.28 |
Overall coefficient of determination using a linear regression model is calculated between Cath, CMR, and the two method for C1 and C2
Qp, Pulmonary blood flow; Qs, Systemic blood flow; Condition 1; C2, Condition 2