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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 7/2006

01-07-2006 | Cardiac

Automated vs. manual assessment of left ventricular function in cardiac multidetector row computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging

Authors: Andreas H. Mahnken, Georg Mühlenbruch, Ralf Koos, Sven Stanzel, Petra Simone Busch, Mathias Niethammer, Rolf W. Günther, Joachim E. Wildberger

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 7/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

We compared semiautomatic contour detection and manual contour tracing in cardiac multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for calculation of left-ventricular (LV) volumes. The study included 30 patients who underwent contrast-enhanced cardiac MDCT and cardiac cine-MRI. Were calculated 8 mm short-axis slices from MDCT data using three-dimensional multiphase image reconstruction. LV volumes including peak ejection rate and peak filling rate were calculated from manually and semiautomatically determined contours. Results were compared to those from cine-MRI with manually drawn contours as the standard of reference. We found good agreement for the LV volumes, with an ejection fraction of 47.1±9.4% for manually drawn contours, 47.9±9.9% for semiautomatically detected contours on MDCT, and 48.0±10.2% for MRI. Except for peak-filling rate analysis of variance revealed no difference between any of these techniques. Bland-Altman plots and Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient showed best agreement between MRI and manual contour tracing in MDCT. Calculation of LV volumes using either semiautomatic or manual contour tracing in cardiac MDCT is therefore feasible when compared to MRI. Automated contour detection needs to be improved to equal manual contour tracing.
Literature
1.
Quintana M, Edner M, Kahan T, Hjemdahl P, Sollevi A, Rehnqvist N (2004) Is left ventricular diastolic function an independent marker of prognosis after acute myocardial infarction? Int J Cardiol 96:183–189CrossRefPubMed
2.
Emond M, Mock MB, Davis KB, Fisher LD, Holmes DR Jr, Chaitman BR, Kaiser GC, Alderman E, Killip T 3rd (1994) Long-term survival of medically treated patients in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) Registry. Circulation 90:2645–2657PubMed
3.
White HD, Norris RM, Brown MA, Brandt PWT, Whitlock RML, Wild CJ (1987) Left ventricular end-systolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction. Circulation 76:44–51PubMed
4.
Alfakih K, Reid S, Jones T, Sivananthan M (2004) Assessment of ventricular function and mass by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 14:1813–1822CrossRefPubMed
5.
Bellenger NG, Burgess MI, Ray SG, Lahiri A, Coats AJ, Cleland JG, Pennell DJ (2000) Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance: are they interchangeable? Eur Heart J 21:1387–1396CrossRefPubMed
6.
Leber AW, Knez A, von Ziegler F, Becker A, Nikolaou K, Paul S, Wintersperger B, Reiser M, Becker CR, Steinbeck G, Boekstegers P (2005) Quantification of obstructive and nonobstructive coronary lesions by 64-slice computed tomography a comparative study with quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 46:147–154PubMedCrossRef
7.
Kuettner A, Beck T, Drosch T, Kettering K, Heuschmid M, Burgstahler C, Claussen CD, Kopp AF, Schroeder S (2005) Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary imaging using 16-detector slice spiral computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. J Am Coll Cardiol 45:123–127CrossRefPubMed
8.
Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Spuentrup E, Busch P, Wildberger JE, Kuhl HP, Gunther RW (2005) Sixteen-slice spiral CT versus MR imaging for the assessment of left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction. Eur Radiol 15:714–720CrossRefPubMed
9.
Heuschmid M, Rothfuss J, Schroder S, Kuttner A, Fenchel M, Stauder N, Mahnken AH, Burgstahler C, Miller S, Claussen CD, Kopp AF (2005) Bestimmung linksventrikulärer Funktionsparameter: Vergleich von 16-Zeilen-Mehrschicht-CT mit der MR-Tomographie. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 177:60–66CrossRefPubMed
10.
Boehm T, Alkadhi H, Roffi M, Willmann JK, Desbiolles LM, Marincek B, Wildermuth S (2004) Time-effectiveness, observer-dependence, and accuracy of measurements of left ventricular ejection fraction using 4-channel MDCT. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 176:529–537CrossRefPubMed
11.
Thompson BH, Stanford W. Evaluation of cardiac function with ultrafast computed tomography. Radiol Clin North Am 32:537–551
12.
Lin LI (1989) A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45:255–268PubMedCrossRef
13.
Schlosser T, Pagonidis K, Herborn CU, Hunold P, Waltering KU, Lauenstein TC, Barkhausen J (2005) Assessment of left ventricular parameters using 16-MDCT and new software for endocardial and epicardial border delineation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:765–773PubMed
14.
Koch K, Oellig F, Kunz P, Bender P, Oberholzer K, Mildenberger P, Hake U, Kreitner KF, Thelen M (2004) Möglichkeiten der 16-Schicht-CT bei der linksventrikulären Funktionsbestimmung: Beurteilung zweier unterschiedlicher Software-Tools zur quantitativen Funktionsanalyse sowie qualitative Bewertung von Wandbewegungsstörungen im Vergleich zur Magnetresonanztomographie. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 176:1786–1793CrossRefPubMed
15.
Juergens KU, Grude M, Maintz D, Fallenberg EM, Wichter T, Heindel W, Fischbach R (2004) Multi-detector row CT of left ventricular function with dedicated analysis software versus MR imaging: initial experience. Radiology 230:403–410PubMedCrossRef
16.
Mahnken AH, Katoh M, Bruners P, Spuentrup E, Wildberger JE, Gunther RW, Buecker A (2005) Acute myocardial infarction: assessment of left ventricular function with 16-detector row spiral CT versus MR imaging—study in pigs. Radiology 236:112–117PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Automated vs. manual assessment of left ventricular function in cardiac multidetector row computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging
Authors
Andreas H. Mahnken
Georg Mühlenbruch
Ralf Koos
Sven Stanzel
Petra Simone Busch
Mathias Niethammer
Rolf W. Günther
Joachim E. Wildberger
Publication date
01-07-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 7/2006
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0226-1

Other articles of this Issue 7/2006

European Radiology 7/2006 Go to the issue

Experimental

High-resolution ex vivo imaging of coronary artery stents using 64-slice computed tomography—initial experience

Calendar of Events

Calendar of events

Cardiac

Accurate estimation of global and regional cardiac function by retrospectively gated multidetector row computed tomography

Urogenital

Contemporary issues in the diagnosis of prostate cancer for the radiologist

Neuro

Dynamics of cerebral edema and the apparent diffusion coefficient of water changes in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. A prospective MRI study

Gastrointestinal

MR colonography: current status