Top

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Research

Defining the optimal temporal and spatial resolution for cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking

Authors: Sören J. Backhaus, Georg Metschies, Marcus Billing, Jonas Schmidt-Rimpler, Johannes T. Kowallick, Roman J. Gertz, Tomas Lapinskas, Elisabeth Pieske-Kraigher, Burkert Pieske, Joachim Lotz, Boris Bigalke, Shelby Kutty, Gerd Hasenfuß, Sebastian Kelle, Andreas Schuster

Published in: Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Myocardial deformation analyses using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) feature tracking (CMR-FT) have incremental value in the assessment of cardiac function beyond volumetric analyses. Since guidelines do not recommend specific imaging parameters, we aimed to define optimal spatial and temporal resolutions for CMR cine images to enable reliable post-processing.

Methods

Intra- and inter-observer reproducibility was assessed in 12 healthy subjects and 9 heart failure (HF) patients. Cine images were acquired with different temporal (20, 30, 40 and 50 frames/cardiac cycle) and spatial resolutions (high in-plane 1.5 × 1.5 mm through-plane 5 mm, standard 1.8 × 1.8 x 8mm and low 3.0 × 3.0 x 10mm). CMR-FT comprised left ventricular (LV) global and segmental longitudinal/circumferential strain (GLS/GCS) and associated systolic strain rates (SR), and right ventricular (RV) GLS.

Results

Temporal but not spatial resolution did impact absolute strain and SR. Maximum absolute changes between lowest and highest temporal resolution were as follows: 1.8% and 0.3%/s for LV GLS and SR, 2.5% and 0.6%/s for GCS and SR as well as 1.4% for RV GLS. Changes of strain values occurred comparing 20 and 30 frames/cardiac cycle including LV and RV GLS and GCS (p < 0.001–0.046). In contrast, SR values (LV GLS/GCS SR) changed significantly comparing all successive temporal resolutions (p < 0.001–0.013). LV strain and SR reproducibility was not affected by either temporal or spatial resolution, whilst RV strain variability decreased with augmentation of temporal resolution.

Conclusion

Temporal but not spatial resolution significantly affects strain and SR in CMR-FT deformation analyses. Strain analyses require lower temporal resolution and 30 frames/cardiac cycle offer consistent strain assessments, whilst SR measurements gain from further increases in temporal resolution.

Available only for authorised users

Bergenzaun L, Ohlin H, Gudmundsson P, Willenheimer R, Chew MS. Mitral annular plane systolic excursion (MAPSE) in shock: a valuable echocardiographic parameter in intensive care patients. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2013;11:16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-7120-11-16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Stanton T, Leano R, Marwick TH. Prediction of all-cause mortality from global longitudinal speckle strain: comparison with ejection fraction and wall motion scoring. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:356–64. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.109.862334.CrossRefPubMed

Neizel M, Korosoglou G, Lossnitzer D, Kühl H, Hoffmann R, Ocklenburg C, et al. Impact of systolic and diastolic deformation indexes assessed by strain-encoded imaging to predict persistent severe myocardial dysfunction in patients after acute myocardial infarction at follow-up. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1056–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2010.02.070.CrossRefPubMed

Mordi I, Bezerra H, Carrick D, Tzemos N. The combined incremental prognostic value of LVEF, late gadolinium enhancement, and global circumferential strain assessed by CMR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8:540–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.02.005.CrossRefPubMed

Mangion K, Carrick D, Carberry J, Mahrous A, McComb C, Oldroyd KG, et al. Circumferential strain predicts major adverse cardiovascular events following an acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Radiology. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018181253.CrossRefPubMed

Park JJ, Park J-B, Park J-H, Cho G-Y. Global longitudinal strain to predict mortality in patients with acute heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:1947–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.02.064.CrossRefPubMed

Russo C, Jin Z, Elkind MSV, Rundek T, Homma S, Sacco RL, Di Tullio MR. Prevalence and prognostic value of subclinical left ventricular systolic dysfunction by global longitudinal strain in a community-based cohort. Eur J Heart Fail. 2014;16:1301–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.154.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Nagueh SF, Smiseth OA, Appleton CP, Byrd BF, Dokainish H, Edvardsen T, et al. Recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography: an update from the american society of echocardiography and the european association of cardiovascular imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;17:1321–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jew082.CrossRefPubMed

Buss SJ, Breuninger K, Lehrke S, Voss A, Galuschky C, Lossnitzer D, et al. Assessment of myocardial deformation with cardiac magnetic resonance strain imaging improves risk stratification in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16:307–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeu181.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Romano S, Judd RM, Kim RJ, Kim HW, Klem I, Heitner JF, et al. Feature-tracking global longitudinal strain predicts death in a multicenter population of patients with ischemic and nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy incremental to ejection fraction and late gadolinium enhancement. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.10.024.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Eitel I, Stiermaier T, Lange T, Rommel K-P, Koschalka A, Kowallick JT, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking for optimized prediction of cardiovascular events following myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11:1433–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.11.034.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Ersbøll M, Valeur N, Mogensen UM, Andersen MJ, Møller JE, Velazquez EJ, et al. Prediction of all-cause mortality and heart failure admissions from global left ventricular longitudinal strain in patients with acute myocardial infarction and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:2365–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.02.061.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Biering-Sørensen T, Jensen JS, Pedersen SH, Galatius S, Fritz-Hansen T, Bech J, et al. Regional Longitudinal Myocardial Deformation Provides Incremental Prognostic Information in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0158280. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158280.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Pennell DJ. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2010;121:692–705. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.811547.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Cao JJ, Ngai N, Duncanson L, Cheng J, Gliganic K, Chen Q. A comparison of both DENSE and feature tracking techniques with tagging for the cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of myocardial strain. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2018;20:26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-018-0448-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Giusca S, Korosoglou G, Zieschang V, Stoiber L, Schnackenburg B, Stehning C, et al. Reproducibility study on myocardial strain assessment using fast-SENC cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Sci Rep. 2018;8:14100. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-32226-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Schuster A, Hor KN, Kowallick JT, Beerbaum P, Kutty S. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking: concepts and clinical applications. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9:e004077. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.115.004077.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Scatteia A, Baritussio A, Bucciarelli-Ducci C. Strain imaging using cardiac magnetic resonance. Heart Fail Rev. 2017;22:465–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10741-017-9621-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Kowallick JT, Morton G, Lamata P, Jogiya R, Kutty S, Lotz J, et al. Inter-study reproducibility of left ventricular torsion and torsion rate quantification using MR myocardial feature tracking. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016;43:128–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24979.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Morton G, Schuster A, Jogiya R, Kutty S, Beerbaum P, Nagel E. Inter-study reproducibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012;14:43. https://doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-14-43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Schuster A, Stahnke V-C, Unterberg-Buchwald C, Kowallick JT, Lamata P, Steinmetz M, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature-tracking assessment of myocardial mechanics: Intervendor agreement and considerations regarding reproducibility. Clin Radiol. 2015;70:989–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2015.05.006.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Gertz RJ, Lange T, Kowallick JT, Backhaus SJ, Steinmetz M, Staab W, et al. Inter-vendor reproducibility of left and right ventricular cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature-tracking. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0193746. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193746.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Schuster A, Kutty S, Padiyath A, Parish V, Gribben P, Danford DA, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking detects quantitative wall motion during dobutamine stress. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2011;13:58. https://doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-13-58.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Schuster A, Paul M, Bettencourt N, Morton G, Chiribiri A, Ishida M, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking for quantitative viability assessment in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Int J Cardiol. 2013;166:413–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.10.137.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Orwat S, Kempny A, Diller G-P, Bauerschmitz P, Bunck AC, Maintz D, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking: a novel method to assess myocardial strain. Comparison with echocardiographic speckle tracking in healthy volunteers and in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. Kardiol Pol. 2014;72:363–71. doi:https://doi.org/10.5603/KP.a2013.0319.

26.

Pedrizzetti G, Claus P, Kilner PJ, Nagel E. Principles of cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature tracking and echocardiographic speckle tracking for informed clinical use. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2016;18:51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-016-0269-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Rösner A, Barbosa D, Aarsæther E, Kjønås D, Schirmer H, d’Hooge J. The influence of frame rate on two-dimensional speckle-tracking strain measurements: a study on silico-simulated models and images recorded in patients. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16:1137–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jev058.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Backhaus SJ, Metschies G, Billing M, Kowallick JT, Gertz RJ, Lapinskas T, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking: Impact of training on observer performance and reproducibility. PLoS ONE. 2019;14:e0210127. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210127.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. Circulation. 2002;105:539–42. https://doi.org/10.1161/hc0402.102975.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Bland M, Altman D. Statistical Methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. The Lancet. 1986;327:307–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.CrossRef

31.

Amzulescu MS, de Craene M, Langet H, Pasquet A, Vancraeynest D, Pouleur AC, et al. Myocardial strain imaging: review of general principles, validation, and sources of discrepancies. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019;20:605–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jez041.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Liang T, Yung L, Yu W. On feature motion decorrelation in ultrasound speckle tracking. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2013;32:435–48. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2012.2230016.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Barron JL, Fleet DJ, Beauchemin SS. Performance of optical flow techniques. Int J Comput Vision. 1994;12:43–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01420984.CrossRef

34.

Hor KN, Baumann R, Pedrizzetti G, Tonti G, Gottliebson WM, Taylor M, et al. Magnetic resonance derived myocardial strain assessment using feature tracking. J Vis Exp. 2011. https://doi.org/10.3791/2356.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Adrian RJ. Particle-Imaging Techniques for Experimental Fluid Mechanics. Annu Rev Fluid Mech. 1991;23:261–304. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fl.23.010191.001401.CrossRef

36.

Vo HQ, Marwick TH, Negishi K. MRI-derived myocardial strain measures in normal subjects. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11:196–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.12.025.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Bucius P, Erley J, Tanacli R, Zieschang V, Giusca S, Korosoglou G, et al. Comparison of feature tracking, fast-SENC, and myocardial tagging for global and segmental left ventricular strain. ESC Heart Fail. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.12576.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Backhaus SJ, Metschies G, Zieschang V, Erley J, Mahsa Zamani S, Kowallick JT, et al. Head-to-head comparison of cardiovascular MR feature tracking cine versus acquisition-based deformation strain imaging using myocardial tagging and strain encoding. Magn Reson Med. 2021;85:357–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.28437.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Schuster A, Morton G, Hussain ST, Jogiya R, Kutty S, Asrress KN, et al. The intra-observer reproducibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking strain assessment is independent of field strength. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:296–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.11.012.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Defining the optimal temporal and spatial resolution for cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking
Authors: Sören J. Backhaus
Georg Metschies
Marcus Billing
Jonas Schmidt-Rimpler
Johannes T. Kowallick
Roman J. Gertz
Tomas Lapinskas
Elisabeth Pieske-Kraigher
Burkert Pieske
Joachim Lotz
Boris Bigalke
Shelby Kutty
Gerd Hasenfuß
Sebastian Kelle
Andreas Schuster
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1532-429X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-021-00740-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Defining the optimal temporal and spatial resolution for cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Myocardial changes on 3T cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in response to haemodialysis with fluid removal

Usefulness of TI-scout images in the assessment of late gadolinium enhancement in children

Simultaneous measurements of 3D wall shear stress and pulse wave velocity in the murine aortic arch

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in children after recovery from symptomatic COVID-19 or MIS-C: a prospective study

Prognostic value of vasodilator stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance after inconclusive stress testing

Multiparametric exercise stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: the EMPIRE trial