Key result
The compressed method for generating left ventricular filling curves significantly reduced analysis time compared to the standard method (median 6.1 vs 12.5 minutes, p < 0.001) while producing similar results.
Why the study?
Normative pediatric data for CMR LV filling curves are lacking, and the standard method to obtain them is time-intensive.
Does a compressed method for generating LV filling curves reduce analysis time while maintaining correlation with standard methodology in healthy pediatric subjects?
Cross-Sectional (n=96)
No
Does a compressed method for generating LV filling curves reduce analysis time while maintaining correlation with standard methodology in healthy pediatric subjects?
Absolute Event Rate: 6.1% vs 12.5%
p-value: p=<0.001
A compressed method for generating LV filling curves by CMR significantly reduces analysis time while maintaining strong correlation with standard methodology, facilitating the clinical assessment of diastolic function in children.
BACKGROUND: Diastolic dysfunction is associated with morbidity and mortality in multiple pediatric disease processes. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides a non-invasive method of studying left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction through the assessment of LV filling curves and left atrial (LA) volume and function. However, there are no normative data for LV filling curves and the standard method is time-intensive. This study aims to compare an alternate, more rapid method of obtaining LV filling curves to standard methodology and report normative CMR diastolic function data for LV filling curves and LA volumes and function. METHODS: Ninety-six healthy pediatric subjects (14.3 ± 3.4 years) with normal CMR defined by normal biventricular size and systolic function without late gadolinium enhancement were included. LV filling curves were generated by removing basal slices without myocardium present throughout the cardiac cycle and apical slices with poor endocardial delineation (compressed method), then re-generated including every phase of myocardium from apex to base (standard method). Indices of diastolic function included peak filling rate and time to peak filling. Systolic metrics included peak ejection rate and time to peak ejection. Both peak ejection and peak filling rates were indexed to end-diastolic volume. LA maximum, minimum and pre-contraction volumes were calculated using a biplane method. Inter-and intra-observer variability were assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the effects of body surface area (BSA), gender and age on metrics of diastolic function. RESULTS: BSA had the largest effect on LV filling curves. Normal LV filling data are reported for both compressed and standard methods. The time to perform the compressed method was significantly shorter than the standard method (median 6.1 min vs. 12.5 min, p < 0.001). Both methods had strong to moderate correlation for all metrics. Intra-observer reproducibility was moderate to high for all LV filling and LA metrics except for time to peak ejection and peak filling. CONCLUSIONS: We report reference values for LV filling metrics and LA volumes. The compressed method is more rapid and produces similar results to standard methodology, which may facilitate the use of LV filling in clinical CMR reporting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Henderson et al. (2023) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy (n=96). Compressed method for LV filling curves vs. Standard method was evaluated on Time to perform LV filling curve analysis (minutes) (p=<0.001). The compressed method for generating left ventricular filling curves significantly reduced analysis time compared to the standard method (median 6.1 vs 12.5 minutes, p < 0.001) while producing similar results.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: