Cargando…

Comparison of MRI, 64-slice MDCT and DSCT in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom

To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) and dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) in assessing global function parameters using a moving heart phantom. A moving heart phantom with known volumes (215–258 ml) moving at 50–100 beats per minute wa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Groen, J. M., van der Vleuten, P. A., Greuter, M. J. W., Zijlstra, F., Oudkerk, M.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2816236/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18953545
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1197-1
_version_ 1782177083957444608
author Groen, J. M.
van der Vleuten, P. A.
Greuter, M. J. W.
Zijlstra, F.
Oudkerk, M.
author_facet Groen, J. M.
van der Vleuten, P. A.
Greuter, M. J. W.
Zijlstra, F.
Oudkerk, M.
author_sort Groen, J. M.
collection PubMed
description To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) and dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) in assessing global function parameters using a moving heart phantom. A moving heart phantom with known volumes (215–258 ml) moving at 50–100 beats per minute was examined by three different imaging modalities using clinically implemented scanning protocols. End-diastolic and end-systolic volumes were calculated by two experienced observers using dedicated post-processing tools. Ejection fraction (EF) and cardiac output (CO) were calculated and mutually compared using Bland-Altman plots. MRI underestimated the ejection EF by 16.1% with a Bland-Altman interval (B-A) of [-4.35 (-2.48) -0.60]. Sixty-four-slice MDCT overestimated the EF by 2.6% with a relatively wide B-A interval of [-3.40 (0.40) 4.20]. DSCT deviated the least from the known phantom volumes, underestimating the volumes by 0.8% with a B-A interval of [-1.17 (-0.13) 0.91]. CO analysis showed similar results. Furthermore, a good correlation was found between DSCT and MRI for EF and CO results. MRI systematically underestimates functional cardiac parameters, ejection fraction and cardiac output of a moving heart phantom. Sixty-four-slice MDCT underestimates or overestimates these functional parameters depending on the heart rate because of limited spatial resolution. DSCT deviates the least from these functional parameters compared to MRI, EBT and 64-slice MDCT.
format Text
id pubmed-2816236
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28162362010-02-13 Comparison of MRI, 64-slice MDCT and DSCT in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom Groen, J. M. van der Vleuten, P. A. Greuter, M. J. W. Zijlstra, F. Oudkerk, M. Eur Radiol Cardiac To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) and dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) in assessing global function parameters using a moving heart phantom. A moving heart phantom with known volumes (215–258 ml) moving at 50–100 beats per minute was examined by three different imaging modalities using clinically implemented scanning protocols. End-diastolic and end-systolic volumes were calculated by two experienced observers using dedicated post-processing tools. Ejection fraction (EF) and cardiac output (CO) were calculated and mutually compared using Bland-Altman plots. MRI underestimated the ejection EF by 16.1% with a Bland-Altman interval (B-A) of [-4.35 (-2.48) -0.60]. Sixty-four-slice MDCT overestimated the EF by 2.6% with a relatively wide B-A interval of [-3.40 (0.40) 4.20]. DSCT deviated the least from the known phantom volumes, underestimating the volumes by 0.8% with a B-A interval of [-1.17 (-0.13) 0.91]. CO analysis showed similar results. Furthermore, a good correlation was found between DSCT and MRI for EF and CO results. MRI systematically underestimates functional cardiac parameters, ejection fraction and cardiac output of a moving heart phantom. Sixty-four-slice MDCT underestimates or overestimates these functional parameters depending on the heart rate because of limited spatial resolution. DSCT deviates the least from these functional parameters compared to MRI, EBT and 64-slice MDCT. Springer-Verlag 2008-10-25 2009 /pmc/articles/PMC2816236/ /pubmed/18953545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1197-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2008 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Cardiac
Groen, J. M.
van der Vleuten, P. A.
Greuter, M. J. W.
Zijlstra, F.
Oudkerk, M.
Comparison of MRI, 64-slice MDCT and DSCT in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom
title Comparison of MRI, 64-slice MDCT and DSCT in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom
title_full Comparison of MRI, 64-slice MDCT and DSCT in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom
title_fullStr Comparison of MRI, 64-slice MDCT and DSCT in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of MRI, 64-slice MDCT and DSCT in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom
title_short Comparison of MRI, 64-slice MDCT and DSCT in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom
title_sort comparison of mri, 64-slice mdct and dsct in assessing functional cardiac parameters of a moving heart phantom
topic Cardiac
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2816236/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18953545
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1197-1
work_keys_str_mv AT groenjm comparisonofmri64slicemdctanddsctinassessingfunctionalcardiacparametersofamovingheartphantom
AT vandervleutenpa comparisonofmri64slicemdctanddsctinassessingfunctionalcardiacparametersofamovingheartphantom
AT greutermjw comparisonofmri64slicemdctanddsctinassessingfunctionalcardiacparametersofamovingheartphantom
AT zijlstraf comparisonofmri64slicemdctanddsctinassessingfunctionalcardiacparametersofamovingheartphantom
AT oudkerkm comparisonofmri64slicemdctanddsctinassessingfunctionalcardiacparametersofamovingheartphantom