Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 1/2006

01-01-2006 | Cardiac

Evaluation of a semiautomatic software tool for left ventricular function analysis with 16-slice computed tomography

Authors: Marc Dewey, Mira Müller, Florian Teige, Bernd Hamm

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 1/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to evaluate a semiautomatic analysis tool for assessing global left ventricular myocardial function with multislice computed tomography (MSCT). We examined 33 patients with MSCT using 16×0.5 mm detector collimation and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on a 1.5-T scanner. MSCT data were analyzed using semiautomatic volumetric analysis software (ANET, CSCF-001A, Toshiba). This software tool automatically creates endo- and epicardial contours that can be manually corrected on all short-axis slices at all reconstructed time points within the cardiac cycle, based on a contour-detection and density-threshold algorithm. All global left ventricular function parameters assessed with the semiautomatic MSCT software were highly correlated with the results of MRI. Bland-Altman analysis showed minor systematic overestimation of end-diastolic (10.7 ml) and end-systolic volumes (5.6 ml) and underestimation of ejection fraction (2.1%) with MSCT as compared with MRI. The post-processing time was moderately but significantly longer with the MSCT software (15.9±2.8 min) than necessary for MRI (14.0±2.5 min, P<0.01), mainly as a result of the longer time required for uploading of the MSCT datasets, which were on average 54 times larger (1.3 GByte). In conclusion, it appears feasible to accurately assess global left ventricular function with MSCT in a reasonable post-processing time using a semiautomatic software tool.
Literature
1.
Kopp AF, Küttner A, Trabold T, Heuschmid M, Schröder S, Claussen CD (2003) MDCT: cardiology indications. Eur Radiol 13(Suppl 5):M102–M115PubMed
2.
Nikolaou K, Sagmeister S, Knez A et al (2003) Multidetector-row computed tomography of the coronary arteries: predictive value and quantitative assessment of non-calcified vessel-wall changes. Eur Radiol 13:2505–2512CrossRefPubMed
3.
Rodenwaldt J (2003) Multislice computed tomography of the coronary arteries. Eur Radiol 13:748–757PubMed
4.
Juergens KU, Grude M, Maintz D et al (2004) Multi-detector row CT of left ventricular function with dedicated analysis software versus MR imaging: initial experience. Radiology 230:403–410PubMed
5.
Mahnken AH, Spuntrup E, Wildberger JE et al (2003) Quantification of cardiac function with multislice spiral CT using retrospective EKG-gating: comparison with MRI. Fortschr Röntgenstr 175:83–88CrossRef
6.
Grude M, Juergens KU, Wichter T et al (2003) Evaluation of global left ventricular myocardial function with electrocardiogram-gated multidetector computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 38:653–661PubMed
7.
Heuschmid M, Rothfuss J, Schröder S et al (2005) Left ventricular functional parameters: comparison of 16-slice spiral CT and MRI. Röfo 177:60–66PubMed
8.
The Multicenter Postinfarction Research Group (1983) Risk stratification and survival after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 309:331–336
9.
Hammermeister KE, DeRouen TA, Dodge HT (1979) Variables predictive of survival in patients with coronary disease. Selection by univariate and multivariate analyses from the clinical, electrocardiographic, exercise, arteriographic, and quantitative angiographic evaluations. Circulation 59:421–430PubMed
10.
Boehm T, Alkadhi H, Roffi M et al (2004) Time-effectiveness, observer-dependence, and accuracy of measurements of left ventricular ejection fraction using 4-channel MDCT. Röfo 176:529–537PubMed
11.
Frericks BB, Caldarone FC, Nashan B et al (2004) 3D CT modeling of hepatic vessel architecture and volume calculation in living donated liver transplantation. Eur Radiol 14:326–333CrossRefPubMed
12.
Neri E, Bargellini I, Rieger M et al (2005) Abdominal aortic aneurysms: virtual imaging and analysis through a remote web server. Eur Radiol 15:348–352CrossRefPubMed
13.
Dewey M, Schnapauff D, Laule M et al (2004) Multislice CT coronary angiography: evaluation of an automatic vessel detection tool. Fortschr Röntgenstr 176:478–483
14.
Wessling J, Fischbach R, Domagk D, Lugering N, Neumann E, Heindel W (2001) Colorectal polyps: detection with multi-slice CT colonography. Fortschr Röntgenstr 173:1069–1071CrossRef
15.
Zhang Z, Berg MH, Ikonen AE, Vanninen RL, Manninen HI (2004) Carotid artery stenosis: reproducibility of automated 3D CT angiography analysis method. Eur Radiol 14:665–672CrossRefPubMed
16.
Dewey M, Laule M, Krug L et al (2004) Multisegment and halfscan reconstruction of 16-slice computed tomography for detection of coronary artery stenoses. Invest Radiol 39:223–229CrossRefPubMed
17.
Aspelin P, Aubry P, Fransson SG, Strasser R, Willenbrock R, Berg KJ (2003) Nephrotoxic effects in high-risk patients undergoing angiography. N Engl J Med 348:491–499CrossRefPubMed
18.
Koch K, Oellig F, Kunz P et al (2004) Assessment of global and regional left ventricular function with a 16-slice spiral-CT using two different software tools for quantitative functional analysis and qualitative evaluation of wall motion changes in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Röfo 176:1786–1793PubMed
19.
Yamaoka O, Yabe T, Okada M et al (1993) Evaluation of left ventricular mass: comparison of ultrafast computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and contrast left ventriculography. Am Heart J 126:1372–1379CrossRefPubMed
20.
Lorenz CH, Walker ES, Morgan VL, Klein SS, Graham TP Jr (1999) Normal human right and left ventricular mass, systolic function, and gender differences by cine magnetic resonance imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 1:7–21
21.
Wintersperger BJ, Nikolaou K, Dietrich O et al (2003) Single breath-hold real-time cine MR imaging: improved temporal resolution using generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition (GRAPPA) algorithm. Eur Radiol 13:1931–1936CrossRefPubMed
22.
Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310PubMed
23.
Stamm G, Nagel HD (2002) CT-expo–a novel program for dose evaluation in CT. Fortschr Röntgenstr 174:1570–1576CrossRef
24.
Crawford MH, Souchek J, Oprian CA et al (1990) Determinants of survival and left ventricular performance after mitral valve replacement. Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study on Valvular Heart Disease. Circulation 81:1173–1181PubMed
25.
Borow KM, Green LH, Mann T et al (1980) End-systolic volume as a predictor of postoperative left ventricular performance in volume overload from valvular regurgitation. Am J Med 68:655–663CrossRefPubMed
26.
White HD, Norris RM, Brown MA, Brandt PW, Whitlock RM, Wild CJ (1987) Left ventricular end-systolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction. Circulation 76:44–51PubMed
27.
Juergens KU, Maintz D, Grude M et al (2005) Multi-detector row computed tomography of the heart: does a multi-segment reconstruction algorithm improve left ventricular volume measurements? Eur Radiol 15:111–117CrossRefPubMed
28.
Mahnken AH, Spuentrup E, Niethammer M et al (2003) Quantitative and qualitative assessment of left ventricular volume with ECG-gated multislice spiral CT: value of different image reconstruction algorithms in comparison to MRI. Acta Radiol 44:604–611PubMed
29.
Yamamuro M, Tadamura E, Kubo S et al (2005) Cardiac functional analysis with multi-detector row CT and segmental reconstruction algorithm: comparison with echocardiography, SPECT, and MR imaging. Radiology 234:381–390PubMed
30.
Koch K, Oellig F, Oberholzer K et al (2005) Assessment of right ventricular function by 16-detector-row CT: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 15:312–318CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of a semiautomatic software tool for left ventricular function analysis with 16-slice computed tomography
Authors
Marc Dewey
Mira Müller
Florian Teige
Bernd Hamm
Publication date
01-01-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 1/2006
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2817-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2006

European Radiology 1/2006 Go to the issue

Musculoskeletal

Normal and pathological MR findings in osteochondral autografts with longitudinal follow-up

Interventional

Pain experience during internal spermatic vein embolization for varicocele: comparison of two cyanoacrylate glues

Letter to the Editor

Osteonecrosis induced by intraoperative radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer

Neuro

FMRI of working memory in patients with mild cognitive impairment and probable Alzheimer’s disease

Interventional

Percutaneous interventional reconstruction of the iliac arteries: primary and long-term success rate in selected TASC C and D lesions

Neuro

Double-echo perfusion-weighted MR imaging: basic concepts and application in brain tumors for the assessment of tumor blood volume and vascular permeability