Key result
Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking demonstrated good inter-modality agreement and correlation with speckle tracking echocardiography for whole-layer global longitudinal strain.
Why the study?
Multilayer strain measurement provides novel layer-specific insight into cardiac contractility, but CMR-FT required validation through direct comparison with STE for multilayer GLS.
Does CMR-FT provide comparable multilayer global longitudinal strain measurements to STE in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Observational (n=100)
Blinded assessors
No
Does CMR-FT provide comparable multilayer global longitudinal strain measurements to STE in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
CMR-FT shows good inter-modality agreement with STE for multilayer global longitudinal strain in AMI patients, though the values are not interchangeable due to wide limits of agreement and underestimation by CMR-FT.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking (CMR-FT) and speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) are well-established strain imaging modalities. Multilayer strain measurement permits independent assessment of endocardial and epicardial strain. This novel and layer specific approach to evaluating myocardial deformation parameters may provide greater insight into cardiac contractility when compared to whole-layer strain analysis. The aim of this study is to validate CMR-FT as a tool for multilayer strain analysis by providing a direct comparison between multilayer global longitudinal strain (GLS) values between CMR-FT and STE. METHODS: We studied 100 patients who had an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), who underwent CMR imaging and echocardiogram at baseline and follow-up (48 ± 13 days). Dedicated tissue tracking software was used to analyse single- and multi-layer GLS values for CMR-FT and STE. RESULTS: Correlation coefficients for CMR-FT and STE were 0.685, 0.687, and 0.660 for endocardial, epicardial, and whole-layer GLS respectively (all p < 0.001). Bland Altman analysis showed good inter-modality agreement with minimal bias. The absolute limits of agreement in our study were 6.4, 5.9, and 5.5 for endocardial, whole-layer, and epicardial GLS respectively. Absolute biases were 1.79, 0.80, and 0.98 respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values showed moderate agreement with values of 0.626, 0.632, and 0.671 respectively (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There is good inter-modality agreement between CMR-FT and STE for whole-layer, endocardial, and epicardial GLS, and although values should not be used interchangeably our study demonstrates that CMR-FT is a viable imaging modality for multilayer strain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ananthapadmanabhan et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Acute myocardial infarction (n=100). Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking (CMR-FT) vs. Speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) was evaluated on Inter-modality correlation for whole-layer global longitudinal strain (r = 0.687, p=<0.001). Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking demonstrated good inter-modality agreement and correlation with speckle tracking echocardiography for whole-layer global longitudinal strain.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: