Why the study?
Does an automated heart model-based method accurately measure LV parameters compared to manual and semi-automated methods in patients undergoing cardiac MRI?
Does an automated heart model-based method accurately measure LV parameters compared to manual and semi-automated methods in patients undergoing cardiac MRI?
Automated heart model-based methods for LV measurement on cardiac MRI significantly overestimate EF, SV, and LV mass compared to manual or semi-automated methods.
May prompt manual verification of automated CMR LV metrics; leaves open need for outcome-validated comparisons.
Purpose : To assess the effect of applying an automated heart model based measurements of left ventricle (LV) and compare with manual and semi-automated measurements at Cardiovascular MR Imaging. Materials and Methods: Sixty-two patients who underwent cardiac 1.5T MR imaging were included. Steady state free precession cine images of 20 phases per cardiac cycle were obtained in short axis views and both 2-chamber and 4-chamber views. Epicardial and endocardial contours were drawn in manual, automated, and semi-automated ways. Based on these acquired contour sets, the end-diastolic (ED) and end-systolic (ES) volumes, ejection fraction (EF), systolic volume (SV) and LV mass were calculated and compared. Results: In EDV and ESV, the differences among three measurement methods were not statistically significant (P = .399 and .145, respectively). However, in EF, SV, and LV mass, the differences were statistically significant (P=.001, <001, <001, respectively) and the measured value from automated method tend to be consistently higher than the values from other two methods. Conclusion: An automatic heart model-based method grossly overestimate EF, SV and LV mass compared with manual or
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chae et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: