Time-averaged segmentation consistently over-estimated ventricular kinetic energy compared to time-resolved segmentation, with peak systolic left ventricular kinetic energy measuring 4.16 mJ versus 3.29 mJ (p=0.005).
Observational (n=10)
No
Does time-resolved segmentation yield significantly different kinetic energy profiles compared to time-averaged segmentation in 4D flow MRI of the ventricles?
While time-averaged segmentation is adequate for qualitative analysis of ventricular kinetic energy, accurate quantitative analysis requires full time-resolved segmentation due to significant differences, particularly in the left ventricle during systole.
Absolute Event Rate: 3.29% vs 4.16%
p-value: p=0.005
Background Four-dimensional flow-sensitive (4D flow) MRI opens the possibility for finding new, non-invasive measures of cardiac function, including KE. Studies using 4D flow MRI have reported correlations between disease states and altered KE profiles. However, the majority of these studies have relied on time-averaged (TA) segmentation rather than time-resolved (TR) segmentation largely because segmenting throughout the cardiac cycle (TR) is time-consuming and labor intensive. The purpose of this study was to determine if there are significant differences between KE profiles calculated using TR and TA segmentation of the right and left ventricles (RV, LV).
Hussaini et al. (Sun,) conducted a observational in Healthy (n=10). Time-resolved (TR) segmentation vs. Time-average (TA) segmentation was evaluated on Peak systolic left ventricular kinetic energy (mJ) (p=0.005). Time-averaged segmentation consistently over-estimated ventricular kinetic energy compared to time-resolved segmentation, with peak systolic left ventricular kinetic energy measuring 4.16 mJ versus 3.29 mJ (p=0.005).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: