Key result
Short-axis CMR orientation demonstrates slightly better test-retest reproducibility for RV volumes versus transverse orientation.
Why the study?
Does short-axis orientation compared to transverse orientation affect the reproducibility of sequential assessment of right ventricular volumes and ejection fraction in healthy volunteers?
Observational (n=18)
Double-blind
No
Does short-axis orientation compared to transverse orientation affect the reproducibility of sequential assessment of right ventricular volumes and ejection fraction in healthy volunteers?
Short-axis and transverse CMR orientations provide similarly reliable and reproducible measures for right ventricular volumes and function, suggesting an additional transverse stack is unnecessary for sole volumetric assessment.
Short-axis may marginally improve RV volume reproducibility in CMR; leaves open whether transverse stacks add value for routine assessment.
Short-axis and transverse orientation both provide reliable and reproducible measures for follow-up of RV volumes and global function. Therefore, additional transverse SSFP cine CMR may not necessarily be required if performed for the sole purpose of quantitative volumetric RV assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
D’Errico et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Right ventricular volumes and function (n=18). Cine CMR vs. Transverse slice orientation was evaluated on Test-retest reproducibility of right ventricular volumes and ejection fraction assessment using short-axis and transverse cine CMR. Short-axis orientation demonstrated slightly better test-retest reproducibility for RV volumes with minimal detectable differences of 10.1 mL for EDV and 8.3 mL for ESV compared to 11.5 mL and 8.4 mL for transverse orientation, respectively.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: