Why the study?
Does axial MDCT image reformation provide comparable left ventricular volume and function assessment to short-axis reformations in patients with coronary artery disease or dilated cardiomyopathy?
Does axial MDCT image reformation provide comparable left ventricular volume and function assessment to short-axis reformations in patients with coronary artery disease or dilated cardiomyopathy?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Axial MDCT image reformations offer a faster alternative to short-axis reformations for assessing LV function in patients with normal or near-normal LV function, but may be limited in dilated cardiomyopathy.
OBJECTIVE: Determination of left ventricular (LV) volumes and global function parameters from MDCT data sets is usually based on short-axis reformations from primarily reconstructed axial images, which prolong postprocessing time. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of LV volumetry and global LV function assessment from axial images in comparison with short-axis image reformations. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This study consisted of 20 patients with either coronary artery disease or dilated cardiomyopathy. We evaluated MDCT results using cine MRI as the reference technique. RESULTS: LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and end-systolic volume (LVESV) were significantly overestimated by the axial MDCT approach in comparison with volume measurements from short-axis CT image reformations. The mean LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was not significantly different (41.2% vs 42.7%). Short-axis and axial MDCT determination of LVEF revealed a systematic underestimation by a mean +/- SD of -2.1% +/- 3.6% versus -3.6% +/- 8.2%, respectively, when compared with LVEF values based on cine MRI. The interobserver variability for volume and function measurements from axial images (LVEDV = 8.5%, LVESV = 10.8%, LVEF = 9.6%) was slightly higher than those measurements from short-axis reformations (LVEDV = 7.2%, LVESV = 9.5%, LVEF = 8.7%). The mean total evaluation time was significantly shorter using axial images (14.1 +/- 3.9 min) compared with short-axis reformations (16.9 +/- 5.2 min) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Determination of LV volumes and assessment of global LV function from axial MDCT image reformations is feasible and time efficient. This approach might be a clinically useful alternative to established short-axis-based measurements in patients with normal or near-normal LV function. A progressive underestimation of LVEF with increasing LV volumes may limit the clinical applicability of the axial approach in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Juergens et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: