Cargando…

Balancing Speed and Accuracy in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Function Post-Processing: Comparing 2 Levels of Automation in 3 Vendors to Manual Assessment

Automating cardiac function assessment on cardiac magnetic resonance short-axis cines is faster and more reproducible than manual contour-tracing; however, accurately tracing basal contours remains challenging. Three automated post-processing software packages (Level 1) were compared to manual asses...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Snel, Gert J.H., Poort, Sharon, Velthuis, Birgitta K., van Deursen, Vincent M., Nguyen, Christopher T., Sosnovik, David, Dierckx, Rudi A.J.O., Slart, Riemer H.J.A., Borra, Ronald J.H., Prakken, Niek H.J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8534796/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34679457
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11101758
_version_ 1784587630916141056
author Snel, Gert J.H.
Poort, Sharon
Velthuis, Birgitta K.
van Deursen, Vincent M.
Nguyen, Christopher T.
Sosnovik, David
Dierckx, Rudi A.J.O.
Slart, Riemer H.J.A.
Borra, Ronald J.H.
Prakken, Niek H.J.
author_facet Snel, Gert J.H.
Poort, Sharon
Velthuis, Birgitta K.
van Deursen, Vincent M.
Nguyen, Christopher T.
Sosnovik, David
Dierckx, Rudi A.J.O.
Slart, Riemer H.J.A.
Borra, Ronald J.H.
Prakken, Niek H.J.
author_sort Snel, Gert J.H.
collection PubMed
description Automating cardiac function assessment on cardiac magnetic resonance short-axis cines is faster and more reproducible than manual contour-tracing; however, accurately tracing basal contours remains challenging. Three automated post-processing software packages (Level 1) were compared to manual assessment. Subsequently, automated basal tracings were manually adjusted using a standardized protocol combined with software package-specific relative-to-manual standard error correction (Level 2). All post-processing was performed in 65 healthy subjects. Manual contour-tracing was performed separately from Level 1 and 2 automated analysis. Automated measurements were considered accurate when the difference was equal or less than the maximum manual inter-observer disagreement percentage. Level 1 (2.1 ± 1.0 min) and Level 2 automated (5.2 ± 1.3 min) were faster and more reproducible than manual (21.1 ± 2.9 min) post-processing, the maximum inter-observer disagreement was 6%. Compared to manual, Level 1 automation had wide limits of agreement. The most reliable software package obtained more accurate measurements in Level 2 compared to Level 1 automation: left ventricular end-diastolic volume, 98% and 53%; ejection fraction, 98% and 60%; mass, 70% and 3%; right ventricular end-diastolic volume, 98% and 28%; ejection fraction, 80% and 40%, respectively. Level 1 automated cardiac function post-processing is fast and highly reproducible with varying accuracy. Level 2 automation balances speed and accuracy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8534796
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85347962021-10-23 Balancing Speed and Accuracy in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Function Post-Processing: Comparing 2 Levels of Automation in 3 Vendors to Manual Assessment Snel, Gert J.H. Poort, Sharon Velthuis, Birgitta K. van Deursen, Vincent M. Nguyen, Christopher T. Sosnovik, David Dierckx, Rudi A.J.O. Slart, Riemer H.J.A. Borra, Ronald J.H. Prakken, Niek H.J. Diagnostics (Basel) Article Automating cardiac function assessment on cardiac magnetic resonance short-axis cines is faster and more reproducible than manual contour-tracing; however, accurately tracing basal contours remains challenging. Three automated post-processing software packages (Level 1) were compared to manual assessment. Subsequently, automated basal tracings were manually adjusted using a standardized protocol combined with software package-specific relative-to-manual standard error correction (Level 2). All post-processing was performed in 65 healthy subjects. Manual contour-tracing was performed separately from Level 1 and 2 automated analysis. Automated measurements were considered accurate when the difference was equal or less than the maximum manual inter-observer disagreement percentage. Level 1 (2.1 ± 1.0 min) and Level 2 automated (5.2 ± 1.3 min) were faster and more reproducible than manual (21.1 ± 2.9 min) post-processing, the maximum inter-observer disagreement was 6%. Compared to manual, Level 1 automation had wide limits of agreement. The most reliable software package obtained more accurate measurements in Level 2 compared to Level 1 automation: left ventricular end-diastolic volume, 98% and 53%; ejection fraction, 98% and 60%; mass, 70% and 3%; right ventricular end-diastolic volume, 98% and 28%; ejection fraction, 80% and 40%, respectively. Level 1 automated cardiac function post-processing is fast and highly reproducible with varying accuracy. Level 2 automation balances speed and accuracy. MDPI 2021-09-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8534796/ /pubmed/34679457 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11101758 Text en © 2021 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
Snel, Gert J.H.
Poort, Sharon
Velthuis, Birgitta K.
van Deursen, Vincent M.
Nguyen, Christopher T.
Sosnovik, David
Dierckx, Rudi A.J.O.
Slart, Riemer H.J.A.
Borra, Ronald J.H.
Prakken, Niek H.J.
Balancing Speed and Accuracy in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Function Post-Processing: Comparing 2 Levels of Automation in 3 Vendors to Manual Assessment
title Balancing Speed and Accuracy in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Function Post-Processing: Comparing 2 Levels of Automation in 3 Vendors to Manual Assessment
title_full Balancing Speed and Accuracy in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Function Post-Processing: Comparing 2 Levels of Automation in 3 Vendors to Manual Assessment
title_fullStr Balancing Speed and Accuracy in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Function Post-Processing: Comparing 2 Levels of Automation in 3 Vendors to Manual Assessment
title_full_unstemmed Balancing Speed and Accuracy in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Function Post-Processing: Comparing 2 Levels of Automation in 3 Vendors to Manual Assessment
title_short Balancing Speed and Accuracy in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Function Post-Processing: Comparing 2 Levels of Automation in 3 Vendors to Manual Assessment
title_sort balancing speed and accuracy in cardiac magnetic resonance function post-processing: comparing 2 levels of automation in 3 vendors to manual assessment
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8534796/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34679457
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11101758
work_keys_str_mv AT snelgertjh balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT poortsharon balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT velthuisbirgittak balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT vandeursenvincentm balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT nguyenchristophert balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT sosnovikdavid balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT dierckxrudiajo balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT slartriemerhja balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT borraronaldjh balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment
AT prakkenniekhj balancingspeedandaccuracyincardiacmagneticresonancefunctionpostprocessingcomparing2levelsofautomationin3vendorstomanualassessment