Cargando…

Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function

(1) Background: With the conventional contour surface method (KfM) for the evaluation of cardiac function parameters, the papillary muscle is considered to be part of the left ventricular volume. This systematic error can be avoided with a relatively easy-to-implement pixel-based evaluation method (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Michler, Kerstin, Hessman, Christopher, Prümmer, Marcus, Achenbach, Stephan, Uder, Michael, Janka, Rolf
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10137814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37189538
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13081437
_version_ 1785032557669122048
author Michler, Kerstin
Hessman, Christopher
Prümmer, Marcus
Achenbach, Stephan
Uder, Michael
Janka, Rolf
author_facet Michler, Kerstin
Hessman, Christopher
Prümmer, Marcus
Achenbach, Stephan
Uder, Michael
Janka, Rolf
author_sort Michler, Kerstin
collection PubMed
description (1) Background: With the conventional contour surface method (KfM) for the evaluation of cardiac function parameters, the papillary muscle is considered to be part of the left ventricular volume. This systematic error can be avoided with a relatively easy-to-implement pixel-based evaluation method (PbM). The objective of this thesis is to compare the KfM and the PbM with regard to their difference due to papillary muscle volume exclusion. (2) Material and Methods: In the retrospective study, 191 cardiac-MR image data sets (126 male, 65 female; median age 51 years; age distribution 20–75 years) were analysed. The left ventricular function parameters: end-systolic volume (ESV), end-diastolic volume (EDV), ejection fraction (EF) and stroke volume (SV) were determined using classical KfW (syngo.via and cvi42 = gold standard) and PbM. Papillary muscle volume was calculated and segmented automatically via cvi42. The time required for evaluation with the PbM was collected. (3) Results: The size of EDV was 177 mL (69–444.5 mL) [average, [minimum–maximum]], ESV was 87 mL (20–361.4 mL), SV was 88 mL and EF was 50% (13–80%) in the pixel-based evaluation. The corresponding values with cvi42 were EDV 193 mL (89–476 mL), ESV 101 mL (34–411 mL), SV 90 mL and EF 45% (12–73%) and syngo.via: EDV 188 mL (74–447 mL), ESV 99 mL (29–358 mL), SV 89 mL (27–176 mL) and EF 47% (13–84%). The comparison between the PbM and KfM showed a negative difference for end-diastolic volume, a negative difference for end-systolic volume and a positive difference for ejection fraction. No difference was seen in stroke volume. The mean papillary muscle volume was calculated to be 14.2 mL. The evaluation with PbM took an average of 2:02 min. (4) Conclusion: PbM is easy and fast to perform for the determination of left ventricular cardiac function. It provides comparable results to the established disc/contour area method in terms of stroke volume and measures “true” left ventricular cardiac function while omitting the papillary muscles. This results in an average 6% higher ejection fraction, which can have a significant influence on therapy decisions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10137814
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101378142023-04-28 Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function Michler, Kerstin Hessman, Christopher Prümmer, Marcus Achenbach, Stephan Uder, Michael Janka, Rolf Diagnostics (Basel) Article (1) Background: With the conventional contour surface method (KfM) for the evaluation of cardiac function parameters, the papillary muscle is considered to be part of the left ventricular volume. This systematic error can be avoided with a relatively easy-to-implement pixel-based evaluation method (PbM). The objective of this thesis is to compare the KfM and the PbM with regard to their difference due to papillary muscle volume exclusion. (2) Material and Methods: In the retrospective study, 191 cardiac-MR image data sets (126 male, 65 female; median age 51 years; age distribution 20–75 years) were analysed. The left ventricular function parameters: end-systolic volume (ESV), end-diastolic volume (EDV), ejection fraction (EF) and stroke volume (SV) were determined using classical KfW (syngo.via and cvi42 = gold standard) and PbM. Papillary muscle volume was calculated and segmented automatically via cvi42. The time required for evaluation with the PbM was collected. (3) Results: The size of EDV was 177 mL (69–444.5 mL) [average, [minimum–maximum]], ESV was 87 mL (20–361.4 mL), SV was 88 mL and EF was 50% (13–80%) in the pixel-based evaluation. The corresponding values with cvi42 were EDV 193 mL (89–476 mL), ESV 101 mL (34–411 mL), SV 90 mL and EF 45% (12–73%) and syngo.via: EDV 188 mL (74–447 mL), ESV 99 mL (29–358 mL), SV 89 mL (27–176 mL) and EF 47% (13–84%). The comparison between the PbM and KfM showed a negative difference for end-diastolic volume, a negative difference for end-systolic volume and a positive difference for ejection fraction. No difference was seen in stroke volume. The mean papillary muscle volume was calculated to be 14.2 mL. The evaluation with PbM took an average of 2:02 min. (4) Conclusion: PbM is easy and fast to perform for the determination of left ventricular cardiac function. It provides comparable results to the established disc/contour area method in terms of stroke volume and measures “true” left ventricular cardiac function while omitting the papillary muscles. This results in an average 6% higher ejection fraction, which can have a significant influence on therapy decisions. MDPI 2023-04-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10137814/ /pubmed/37189538 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13081437 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Michler, Kerstin
Hessman, Christopher
Prümmer, Marcus
Achenbach, Stephan
Uder, Michael
Janka, Rolf
Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function
title Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function
title_full Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function
title_fullStr Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function
title_full_unstemmed Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function
title_short Cardiac MRI: An Alternative Method to Determine the Left Ventricular Function
title_sort cardiac mri: an alternative method to determine the left ventricular function
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10137814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37189538
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13081437
work_keys_str_mv AT michlerkerstin cardiacmrianalternativemethodtodeterminetheleftventricularfunction
AT hessmanchristopher cardiacmrianalternativemethodtodeterminetheleftventricularfunction
AT prummermarcus cardiacmrianalternativemethodtodeterminetheleftventricularfunction
AT achenbachstephan cardiacmrianalternativemethodtodeterminetheleftventricularfunction
AT udermichael cardiacmrianalternativemethodtodeterminetheleftventricularfunction
AT jankarolf cardiacmrianalternativemethodtodeterminetheleftventricularfunction