What question did this study set out to answer?

Establish normative reference ranges for 3D feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance (FT-CMR) and assess its reproducibility relative to 2D FT-CMR across age and sex.

November 27, 2017International journal of cardiac imagingOpen Access

Reference ranges for three-dimensional feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance: comparison with two-dimensional methodology and relevance of age and gender

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Why the study?

Does 3D FT-CMR provide different reference ranges and better reproducibility compared to 2D FT-CMR for assessing left ventricular myocardial strain in healthy individuals?

Key Points

Establish normative reference ranges for 3D feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance (FT-CMR) and assess its reproducibility relative to 2D FT-CMR across age and sex.
Evaluated 100 healthy individuals divided into five age deciles from 20 to 70 years (10 men and 10 women per decile) without cardiovascular, metabolic, or systemic disease.
Performed 2D and 3D FT-CMR of left ventricular myocardial strain and strain rate using steady-state free precession (SSFP) cine imaging.
Normal strain values measured by 3D FT-CMR were consistently lower than 2D FT-CMR measurements (global circumferential strain: 3D −17.6 ± 2.6% vs. 2D −20.9 ± 3.7%, P < 0.005).
The 3D algorithm improved reproducibility over 2D, achieving high inter-observer agreement for global circumferential strain (ICC 0.88), global radial strain (ICC 0.79), and global longitudinal strain (ICC 0.74).
Increasing age correlated weakly with higher global circumferential strain (R = 0.38, R² = 0.15), higher peak systolic and late diastolic strain rates, and lower peak early systolic strain rates.

Structured PICO

Does 3D FT-CMR provide different reference ranges and better reproducibility compared to 2D FT-CMR for assessing left ventricular myocardial strain in healthy individuals?

Population

100 healthy individuals (10 men and 10 women in each of 5 age deciles from 20 to 70 years) without hypertension, diabetes, obesity, dyslipidaemia, or any cardiovascular, renal, hepatic, haematological and systemic inflammatory disease.

Intervention

3D feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance (3D FT-CMR)

Comparator

2D feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance (2D FT-CMR)

Outcome

Reference ranges for left ventricular myocardial strain and strain rate, and reproducibility (intra- and inter-observer agreement)surrogate

3D FT-CMR provides lower normal reference values for myocardial strain compared to 2D FT-CMR but offers superior reproducibility, particularly for circumferential strain.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Implication

Clinicians should apply modality-specific strain references; cross-sectional data leaves open prospective outcome validation before routine 3D FT-CMR adoption.

Cite This Study

Liu et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0fc0d12badbc352afea815 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-017-1277-x

Topics

Cardiac MRI

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Clinicians should apply modality-specific strain references; cross-sectional data leaves open prospective outcome validation before routine 3D FT-CMR adoption.

Reference ranges for three-dimensional feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance: comparison with two-dimensional methodology and relevance of age and gender

Key Points

Structured PICO

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Topics

Reference ranges for three-dimensional feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance: comparison with two-dimensional methodology and relevance of age and gender

Key Points

Structured PICO

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Topics

Also Consider