Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking showed good global longitudinal strain correlation with 2D and 3D echocardiography speckle tracking (r = 0.83 and 0.87, respectively).
Cross-Sectional (n=106)
Does CMR feature tracking provide comparable global left ventricular strain measurements to 2D/3D echocardiography speckle tracking?
CMR feature tracking is a reliable alternative to 2D/3D echocardiography for quantifying global left ventricular strain, particularly useful for patients with poor echocardiographic windows.
Effect estimate: r = 0.83 (2DEST) and 0.87 (3DEST)
AIMS: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) feature tracking (FT) with steady-state free precession (SSFP) has advantages over traditional myocardial tagging to analyse left ventricular (LV) strain. However, direct comparisons of CMRFT and 2D/3D echocardiography speckle tracking (2/3DEST) for measurement of LV strain are limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and reliability of CMRFT and 2D/3DEST for measurement of global LV strain. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 106 patients who agreed to undergo both CMR and 2D/3DE on the same day. SSFP images at multiple short-axis and three apical views were acquired. 2DE images from three levels of short-axis, three apical views, and 3D full-volume datasets were also acquired. Strain data were expressed as absolute values. Feasibility was highest in CMRFT, followed by 2DEST and 3DEST. Analysis time was shortest in 3DEST, followed by CMRFT and 2DEST. There was good global longitudinal strain (GLS) correlation between CMRFT and 2D/3DEST (r = 0.83 and 0.87, respectively) with the limit of agreement (LOA) ranged from ±3.6 to ±4.9%. Excellent global circumferential strain (GCS) correlation between CMRFT and 2D/3DEST was observed (r = 0.90 and 0.88) with LOA of ±6.8-8.5%. Global radial strain showed fair correlations (r = 0.69 and 0.82, respectively) with LOA ranged from ±12.4 to ±16.3%. CMRFT GCS showed least observer variability with highest intra-class correlation. CONCLUSION: Although not interchangeable, the high GLS and GCS correlation between CMRFT and 2D/3DEST makes CMRFT a useful modality for quantification of global LV strain in patients, especially those with suboptimal echo image quality.
Obokata et al. (2015) reported a cross-sectional. Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking (CMRFT) vs. 2D/3D echocardiography speckle tracking (2/3DEST) was evaluated on Global longitudinal strain (GLS) correlation (r = 0.83 (2DEST) and 0.87 (3DEST)). Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking showed good global longitudinal strain correlation with 2D and 3D echocardiography speckle tracking (r = 0.83 and 0.87, respectively).