Automated assessment of heart chamber volumes and function in patients with previous myocardial infarction using multidetector computed tomography

Andreas Fuchs; Jørgen Tobias Kühl; Jacob Lønborg; Thomas Engstrøm; Niels Vejlstrup; Lars Køber; Klaus F Kofoed

doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2012.01.006

Automated assessment of heart chamber volumes and function in patients with previous myocardial infarction using multidetector computed tomography

Andreas Fuchs, Jørgen Tobias Kühl, Jacob Lønborg, Thomas Engstrøm, Niels Vejlstrup, Lars Køber, Klaus F Kofoed

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Left ventricular (LV), right ventricular (RV), and left atrial (LA) volumes and functions contain important prognostic information in ischemic heart disease. Because multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) has high spatial resolution, this method may be optimal to obtain this information. Objective: We evaluated automated assessment for MDCT, by comparing it with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Methods: Fifty-three patients with previous myocardial infarction were scanned with 1.5 Tesla CMR and 64-slice MDCT. End-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume, stroke volume, and ejection fraction (EF) were assessed for the left and right ventricle with automatic MDCT software and manual CMR software. LV myocardial mass and cyclic changes in LA volume were derived. Results: The mean age of patients was 61 ± 10 years, 40 (75%) were men. Automated MDCT segmentation was possible in all but 2 patients. The average duration of image processing was 21 ± 4 minutes by CMR and 11 ± 4 minutes by MDCT. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between MDCT and CMR with only small bias. LVEF by CMR was 56% ± 10% and by MDCT 61% ± 11%, mean difference of -5% (limits of agreement, -18% to 8%), and P < 0.001. RVEF by CMR was 60% ± 5% and by MDCT 56% ± 8%, mean difference of 5% (limits of agreement, -10% to 20%), and P < 0.001. LA fractional change by CMR was 49% ± 9% and by MDCT 45% ± 9%, mean difference of 4% (limits of agreement, -12% to 20%), and P ≤ 0.001. Conclusion: LV, RV, and LA volumes and functions may be evaluated fast and reliably with the use of automated assessment and cardiac MDCT, with good agreement to CMR. Accurate assessment of cardiac chambers with MDCT appears possible in clinical practice.

Original language	English
Journal	Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
Volume	6
Issue number	5
Pages (from-to)	325-34
Number of pages	10
ISSN	1934-5925
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2012.01.006
Publication status	Published - Sept 2012

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jcct.2012.01.006

Cite this

Automated assessment of heart chamber volumes and function in patients with previous myocardial infarction using multidetector computed tomography. / Fuchs, Andreas; Kühl, Jørgen Tobias; Lønborg, Jacob et al.

In: Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Vol. 6, No. 5, 09.2012, p. 325-34.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

@article{e6117b601012451784d407ef069bb5a8,

title = "Automated assessment of heart chamber volumes and function in patients with previous myocardial infarction using multidetector computed tomography",

abstract = "Background: Left ventricular (LV), right ventricular (RV), and left atrial (LA) volumes and functions contain important prognostic information in ischemic heart disease. Because multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) has high spatial resolution, this method may be optimal to obtain this information. Objective: We evaluated automated assessment for MDCT, by comparing it with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Methods: Fifty-three patients with previous myocardial infarction were scanned with 1.5 Tesla CMR and 64-slice MDCT. End-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume, stroke volume, and ejection fraction (EF) were assessed for the left and right ventricle with automatic MDCT software and manual CMR software. LV myocardial mass and cyclic changes in LA volume were derived. Results: The mean age of patients was 61 ± 10 years, 40 (75%) were men. Automated MDCT segmentation was possible in all but 2 patients. The average duration of image processing was 21 ± 4 minutes by CMR and 11 ± 4 minutes by MDCT. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between MDCT and CMR with only small bias. LVEF by CMR was 56% ± 10% and by MDCT 61% ± 11%, mean difference of -5% (limits of agreement, -18% to 8%), and P < 0.001. RVEF by CMR was 60% ± 5% and by MDCT 56% ± 8%, mean difference of 5% (limits of agreement, -10% to 20%), and P < 0.001. LA fractional change by CMR was 49% ± 9% and by MDCT 45% ± 9%, mean difference of 4% (limits of agreement, -12% to 20%), and P ≤ 0.001. Conclusion: LV, RV, and LA volumes and functions may be evaluated fast and reliably with the use of automated assessment and cardiac MDCT, with good agreement to CMR. Accurate assessment of cardiac chambers with MDCT appears possible in clinical practice.",

author = "Andreas Fuchs and K{\"u}hl, {J{\o}rgen Tobias} and Jacob L{\o}nborg and Thomas Engstr{\o}m and Niels Vejlstrup and Lars K{\o}ber and Kofoed, {Klaus F}",

year = "2012",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.jcct.2012.01.006",

language = "English",

volume = "6",

pages = "325--34",

journal = "Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography",

issn = "1934-5925",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Automated assessment of heart chamber volumes and function in patients with previous myocardial infarction using multidetector computed tomography

AU - Fuchs, Andreas

AU - Kühl, Jørgen Tobias

AU - Lønborg, Jacob

AU - Engstrøm, Thomas

AU - Vejlstrup, Niels

AU - Køber, Lars

AU - Kofoed, Klaus F

PY - 2012/9

Y1 - 2012/9

N2 - Background: Left ventricular (LV), right ventricular (RV), and left atrial (LA) volumes and functions contain important prognostic information in ischemic heart disease. Because multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) has high spatial resolution, this method may be optimal to obtain this information. Objective: We evaluated automated assessment for MDCT, by comparing it with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Methods: Fifty-three patients with previous myocardial infarction were scanned with 1.5 Tesla CMR and 64-slice MDCT. End-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume, stroke volume, and ejection fraction (EF) were assessed for the left and right ventricle with automatic MDCT software and manual CMR software. LV myocardial mass and cyclic changes in LA volume were derived. Results: The mean age of patients was 61 ± 10 years, 40 (75%) were men. Automated MDCT segmentation was possible in all but 2 patients. The average duration of image processing was 21 ± 4 minutes by CMR and 11 ± 4 minutes by MDCT. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between MDCT and CMR with only small bias. LVEF by CMR was 56% ± 10% and by MDCT 61% ± 11%, mean difference of -5% (limits of agreement, -18% to 8%), and P < 0.001. RVEF by CMR was 60% ± 5% and by MDCT 56% ± 8%, mean difference of 5% (limits of agreement, -10% to 20%), and P < 0.001. LA fractional change by CMR was 49% ± 9% and by MDCT 45% ± 9%, mean difference of 4% (limits of agreement, -12% to 20%), and P ≤ 0.001. Conclusion: LV, RV, and LA volumes and functions may be evaluated fast and reliably with the use of automated assessment and cardiac MDCT, with good agreement to CMR. Accurate assessment of cardiac chambers with MDCT appears possible in clinical practice.

AB - Background: Left ventricular (LV), right ventricular (RV), and left atrial (LA) volumes and functions contain important prognostic information in ischemic heart disease. Because multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) has high spatial resolution, this method may be optimal to obtain this information. Objective: We evaluated automated assessment for MDCT, by comparing it with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Methods: Fifty-three patients with previous myocardial infarction were scanned with 1.5 Tesla CMR and 64-slice MDCT. End-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume, stroke volume, and ejection fraction (EF) were assessed for the left and right ventricle with automatic MDCT software and manual CMR software. LV myocardial mass and cyclic changes in LA volume were derived. Results: The mean age of patients was 61 ± 10 years, 40 (75%) were men. Automated MDCT segmentation was possible in all but 2 patients. The average duration of image processing was 21 ± 4 minutes by CMR and 11 ± 4 minutes by MDCT. Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between MDCT and CMR with only small bias. LVEF by CMR was 56% ± 10% and by MDCT 61% ± 11%, mean difference of -5% (limits of agreement, -18% to 8%), and P < 0.001. RVEF by CMR was 60% ± 5% and by MDCT 56% ± 8%, mean difference of 5% (limits of agreement, -10% to 20%), and P < 0.001. LA fractional change by CMR was 49% ± 9% and by MDCT 45% ± 9%, mean difference of 4% (limits of agreement, -12% to 20%), and P ≤ 0.001. Conclusion: LV, RV, and LA volumes and functions may be evaluated fast and reliably with the use of automated assessment and cardiac MDCT, with good agreement to CMR. Accurate assessment of cardiac chambers with MDCT appears possible in clinical practice.

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcct.2012.01.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jcct.2012.01.006

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 23040538

SN - 1934-5925

VL - 6

SP - 325

EP - 334

JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography

JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography

IS - 5

ER -

Automated assessment of heart chamber volumes and function in patients with previous myocardial infarction using multidetector computed tomography

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this