Why the study?
Does semiautomatic contour detection using CAMRA software provide comparable ejection fraction measurements to manual planimetry in patients undergoing cardiac MRI?
Does semiautomatic contour detection using CAMRA software provide comparable ejection fraction measurements to manual planimetry in patients undergoing cardiac MRI?
The CAMRA software provides reproducible and accurate semiautomatic evaluation of global left ventricular ejection fraction compared to manual planimetry, supporting its use in multicenter trials.
Semiautomatic EF assessment may be feasible in cardiac MRI; leaves open validation for routine or multicenter use.
Quantitative analysis of functional cardiac magnetic resonance (MR) images has been limited by the lack of well-validated, semiautomatic, methods for rapid analysis. We describe the evaluation of a DICOM-compatible PC-based parallel-processing tool, for cardiac magnetic resonance analysis (CAMRA), which supports semiautomatic image mensuration using an active contour model-based algorithm. The CAMRA software was used to analyze data from 12 patients in a multicenter acquisition and analysis trial to compare semiautomatic contour detection with manual planimetry of the left ventricular endocardium from short-axis, breath-held, cine gradient-echo images. There was excellent agreement between the manual and semiautomatic measurements of global left ventricular function, with no significant (P = 0.32) difference in the determination of ejection fraction (-0.9 +/- 3.1% [mean difference +/- 1 standard deviation]). There was no significant interobserver difference in the semiautomatically measured ejection fraction. Additionally, a single observer completed the analysis on data from 30 patients and found no significant (P = 0.05) difference in the determination of ejection fraction (-1.3 +/- 3.5% [mean difference +/- 1 standard deviation]). The CAMRA software demonstrates the capability for the reproducible evaluation of global left ventricular function in cardiac patients, with adequate interobserver reproducibility for use in multicenter trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Graves et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: