Dataset Information

Reproducibility of left atrial function using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To determine the test-retest reproducibility and observer variability of CMR-derived LA function, using (i) LA strain (LAS) and strain rate (LASR), and (ii) LA volumes (LAV) and emptying fraction (LAEF).

Methods

Sixty participants with and without cardiovascular disease (aortic stenosis (AS) (n = 16), type 2 diabetes (T2D) (n = 28), end-stage renal disease on haemodialysis (n = 10) and healthy volunteers (n = 6)) underwent two separate CMR scans 7-14 days apart. LAS and LASR, corresponding to LA reservoir, conduit and contractile booster-pump function, were assessed using Feature Tracking software (QStrain v2.0). LAEF was calculated using the biplane area length method (QMass v8.1). Both were assessed using 4- and 2-chamber long-axis standard steady-state free precession cine images, and average values were calculated. Intra- and inter-observer variabilities were assessed in 10 randomly selected participants.

Results

The test-retest reproducibility was moderate to poor for all strain and strain rate parameters. Overall, strain and strain rate corresponding to reservoir phase (LAS_r, LASR_r) were the most reproducible, yielding the smallest coefficient of variance (CoV) (29.9% for LAS_r, 28.9% for LASR_r). The test-retest reproducibility for LAVs and LAEF was good: LAVmax CoV = 19.6% ICC = 0.89, LAVmin CoV = 27.0% ICC = 0.89 and total LAEF CoV = 15.6% ICC = 0.78. The inter- and intra-observer variabilities were good for all parameters except for conduit function.

Conclusion

The test-retest reproducibility of LA strain and strain rate assessment by CMR utilising Feature Tracking is moderate to poor across disease states, whereas LA volume and emptying fraction are more reproducible on CMR. Further improvements in LA strain quantification are needed before widespread clinical application.

Key points

• LA strain and strain rate assessment using Feature Tracking on CMR has moderate to poor test-retest reproducibility across disease states. • The test-retest reproducibility for the biplane method of assessing LA function is better than strain assessment, with lower coefficient of variances and narrower limits of agreement on Bland-Altman plots. • Biplane LA volumetric measurement also has better intra- and inter-observer variability compared to strain assessment.

SUBMITTER: Alfuhied A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8043954 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiastolic dysfunction is associated with morbidity and mortality in multiple pediatric disease processes. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides a non-invasive method of studying left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction through the assessment of LV filling curves and left atrial (LA) volume and function. However, there are no normative data for LV filling curves and the standard method is time-intensive. This study aims to compare an alternate, more rapid method of obtaining LV filling curves to standard methodology and report normative CMR diastolic function data for LV filling curves and LA volumes and function.MethodsNinety-six healthy pediatric subjects (14.3 ± 3.4 years) with normal CMR defined by normal biventricular size and systolic function without late gadolinium enhancement were included. LV filling curves were generated by removing basal slices without myocardium present throughout the cardiac cycle and apical slices with poor endocardial delineation (compressed method), then re-generated including every phase of myocardium from apex to base (standard method). Indices of diastolic function included peak filling rate and time to peak filling. Systolic metrics included peak ejection rate and time to peak ejection. Both peak ejection and peak filling rates were indexed to end-diastolic volume. LA maximum, minimum and pre-contraction volumes were calculated using a biplane method. Inter-and intra-observer variability were assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the effects of body surface area (BSA), gender and age on metrics of diastolic function.ResultsBSA had the largest effect on LV filling curves. Normal LV filling data are reported for both compressed and standard methods. The time to perform the compressed method was significantly shorter than the standard method (median 6.1 min vs. 12.5 min, p < 0.001). Both methods had strong to moderate correlation for all metrics. Intra-observer reproducibility was moderate to high for all LV filling and LA metrics except for time to peak ejection and peak filling.ConclusionsWe report reference values for LV filling metrics and LA volumes. The compressed method is more rapid and produces similar results to standard methodology, which may facilitate the use of LV filling in clinical CMR reporting.

Project description:Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging provides reliable assessments of biventricular morphology and function. Since manual post-processing is time-consuming and prone to observer variability, efforts have been directed towards novel artificial intelligence-based fully automated analyses. Hence, we sought to investigate the impact of artificial intelligence-based fully automated assessments on the inter-study variability of biventricular volumes and function. Eighteen participants (11 with normal, 3 with heart failure and preserved and 4 with reduced ejection fraction (EF)) underwent serial CMR imaging at in median 63 days (range 49-87) interval. Short axis cine stacks were acquired for the evaluation of left ventricular (LV) mass, LV and right ventricular (RV) end-diastolic, end-systolic and stroke volumes as well as EF. Assessments were performed manually (QMass, Medis Medical Imaging Systems, Leiden, Netherlands) by an experienced (3 years) and inexperienced reader (no active reporting, 45 min of training with five cases from the SCMR consensus data) as well as fully automated (suiteHEART, Neosoft, Pewaukee, WI, USA) without any manual corrections. Inter-study reproducibility was overall excellent with respect to LV volumetric indices, best for the experienced observer (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) > 0.98, coefficient of variation (CoV, < 9.6%) closely followed by automated analyses (ICC > 0.93, CoV < 12.4%) and lowest for the inexperienced observer (ICC > 0.86, CoV < 18.8%). Inter-study reproducibility of RV volumes was excellent for the experienced observer (ICC > 0.88, CoV < 10.7%) but considerably lower for automated and inexperienced manual analyses (ICC > 0.69 and > 0.46, CoV < 22.8% and < 28.7% respectively). In this cohort, fully automated analyses allowed reliable serial investigations of LV volumes with comparable inter-study reproducibility to manual analyses performed by an experienced CMR observer. In contrast, RV automated quantification with current algorithms still relied on manual post-processing for reliability.