Key result
FWHM method cuts myocarditis LGE extent variability ~35% compared with the 3σ approach.
Why the study?
Variability in quantifying myocarditis extent results from imprecise image segmentation and inconclusive data on late gadolinium enhancement quantification method selection.
Does the FWHM method improve LGE extent variability compared to the 3σ method in patients with myocarditis?
Does the FWHM method improve LGE extent variability compared to the 3σ method in patients with myocarditis?
The FWHM method may offer more reproducible quantification of myocardial damage in myocarditis compared to the 3σ method.
FWHM may lower LGE variability in myocarditis; leaves open whether it improves outcomes or warrants clinical adoption.
Background: Myocardial damage in myocarditis is assessed through late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Variability in quantifying myocarditis extent results from imprecise image segmentation and inconclusive data on quantification method selection. To improve analysis precision, segmentation steps are systematically ranked based on their inherent risks of error. Additionally, data on two distinct quantification methods are presented. Methods: Using newly developed software, four experts analyzed five LGE-CMR left ventricular (LV) short-axis (SAx) images of myocarditis patients in three sessions. Regions of interest (ROIs) (myocardial (ROImyoc), reference (ROIref), and exclusion region (ROIexcl)) were identified and used to calculate LGE extent with 3σ (intensity above three standard deviations (σ) in reference) and the full width at half maximum (FWHM) method (intensity above 50% of maximum signal in reference). The reference LGE extent was calculated and the influence of the ROIs on LGE extent variability was determined. Interobserver and intraobserver variability were evaluated as 1-intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: LGE extent variability was 6.2 ± 0.6% for 3σ and 4.0 ± 0.6% for FWHM. The contributions of ROImyoc, ROIref, and ROIexcl were 1.5 ± 0.2%, 2.7 ± 0.4%, and 2 ± 0.3%, respectively, for 3σ, and 1.1 ± 0.1%, 1.6 ± 0.4%, and 1.3 ± 0.3%, respectively, for FWHM. LGE extent was lower in FWHM. Interobserver variability was 0.56 for 3σ and 0.43 for FWHM. The intraobserver variability was higher for the 3σ method in all four observers. Conclusion: ROIref selection contributed most to LGE extent variability. FWHM yielded lower LGE extent and lower inter- and intraobserver variability. Due to low statistical significance, the findings are only partially confirmed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kralj et al. (2023) studied Myocarditis (n=5). Full width at half maximum (FWHM) method vs. 3σ thresholding method was evaluated on LGE extent variability. The FWHM method yielded lower LGE extent variability (4.0%) compared to the 3σ method (6.2%) in the analysis of CMR images from patients with myocarditis.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: