Feature tracking cardiovascular magnetic resonance measured radial dyssynchrony with high correlation to speckle tracking echocardiography (r = 0.93, p < 0.0001).
Cross-Sectional (n=72)
Single-blind
No
Does feature tracking cardiovascular magnetic resonance (FT-CMR) accurately measure left ventricular radial dyssynchrony compared to speckle tracking echocardiography in patients undergoing LV function evaluation?
Feature tracking CMR provides a feasible alternative to speckle tracking echocardiography for measuring left ventricular radial dyssynchrony, particularly in patients with marked dyssynchrony.
Effect estimate: r = 0.93
p-value: p=<0.0001
BACKGROUND: Analysis of left ventricular (LV) mechanical dyssynchrony may provide incremental prognostic information regarding cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response in addition to QRS width alone. Our objective was to quantify LV dyssynchrony using feature tracking post processing of routine cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) cine acquisitions (FT-CMR) in comparison to speckle tracking echocardiography. METHODS: We studied 72 consecutive patients who had both steady-state free precession CMR and echocardiography. Mid-LV short axis CMR cines were analyzed using FT-CMR software and compared with echocardiographic speckle tracking radial dyssynchrony (time difference between the anteroseptal and posterior wall peak strain). RESULTS: Radial dyssynchrony analysis was possible by FT-CMR in all patients, and in 67 (93%) by echocardiography. Dyssynchrony by FT-CMR and speckle tracking showed limits of agreement of strain delays of ± 84 ms. These were large (up to 100% or more) relative to the small mean delays measured in more synchronous patients, but acceptable (mainly 200 ms. Radial dyssynchrony was significantly greater in wide QRS patients than narrow QRS patients by both FT-CMR (radial strain delay 230 ± 94 vs. 77 ± 92* ms) and speckle tracking (radial strain delay 242 ± 101 vs. 75 ± 88* ms, all *p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: FT-CMR delivered measurements of radial dyssynchrony from CMR cine acquisitions which, at least for the patients with more marked dyssynchrony, showed reasonable agreement with those from speckle tracking echocardiography. The clinical usefulness of the method, for example in predicting prognosis in CRT patients, remains to be investigated.
Onishi et al. (2013) conducted a cross-sectional in Left ventricular dysfunction (n=72). Feature tracking cardiovascular magnetic resonance (FT-CMR) vs. Echocardiographic speckle tracking was evaluated on Correlation of anteroseptal to posterior wall delay between FT-CMR and speckle tracking echocardiography (r = 0.93, p=<0.0001). Feature tracking cardiovascular magnetic resonance measured radial dyssynchrony with high correlation to speckle tracking echocardiography (r = 0.93, p < 0.0001).