Key result
Threshold-based MRI segmentation yields lower ventricular volumes and higher EF vs conventional contouring, altering clinical decisions.
Why the study?
The quantitative differences in LV and RV parameters and their clinical impact when using different CMR post-processing techniques are less studied.
Does threshold-based contouring compared to conventional contouring alter cardiac MRI ventricular parameters and clinical decision-making in patients with hypertrabeculated conditions?
Observational (n=150)
Does threshold-based contouring compared to conventional contouring alter cardiac MRI ventricular parameters and clinical decision-making in patients with hypertrabeculated conditions?
Threshold-based contouring for cardiac MRI significantly alters ventricular volume and mass measurements compared to conventional contouring, impacting diagnostic and therapeutic decisions in patients with cardiomyopathies.
BACKGROUND: The quantitative differences of left and right ventricular (LV, RV) parameters of using different cardiac MRI (CMR) post-processing techniques and their clinical impact are less studied. We aimed to assess the differences and their clinical impact between the conventional contouring (CC) and the threshold-based (TB) methods using 70% and 50% thresholds in different hypertrabeculated conditions. METHODS: This retrospective study included 30 dilated cardiomyopathy, 30 left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC), 30 arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy patients, 30 healthy athletes and 30 healthy volunteers. All participants underwent CMR imaging on 1.5 T. Cine sequences were used to derive measures of the cardiac volumes, function, total muscle mass (TMi) and trabeculae and papillary muscle mass (TPMi) using CC and TB segmentation methods. RESULTS: Comparing the CC and the 70% and 50% threshold TB methods, the LV and RV volumes were significantly lower, the ejection fraction (EF) and the TMi were significantly higher with the TB methods. Between the two threshold setups, only TPMi was significantly higher with the 70% threshold. Regarding the clinical benefits, the LVNC was the only group in whom all the diagnostic and therapeutic decisions and risk stratification were influenced using the TB method. Diagnostic changes occurred in three-quarters of the population, and all the cardiomyopathy groups were affected regarding the decision-making about pharmaco- and device therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Using the TB method, only TPMi was significantly higher with the 70% threshold than the 50% setup, and both of them differed significantly from the CC technique, with relevant clinical impacts in all patient groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grebur et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Hypertrabeculated conditions (cardiomyopathies, healthy athletes, healthy volunteers) (n=150). Threshold-based (TB) segmentation methods (70% and 50% thresholds) vs. Conventional contouring (CC) method was evaluated on Cardiac volumes, function, total muscle mass, and trabeculae and papillary muscle mass. Threshold-based cardiac MRI segmentation yielded significantly lower ventricular volumes and higher ejection fraction compared to conventional contouring, altering clinical decisions in cardiomyopathies.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: