Key result
Ultrafast algorithm matches expert LVEF analysis with <3% mean difference.
Why the study?
Intense time and labor requirements for cardiac magnetic resonance data acquisition and processing have discouraged many clinicians from using it.
Does an ultrafast algorithm using temporal intensity variation accurately compute LVEF compared to expert manual analysis in patients undergoing cardiac MRI?
Does an ultrafast algorithm using temporal intensity variation accurately compute LVEF compared to expert manual analysis in patients undergoing cardiac MRI?
Effect estimate: Mean difference <3% for LVEF
An ultrafast algorithm based on temporal intensity variation can accurately and rapidly compute LVEF from cine cardiac MRI images, potentially reducing processing time and labor for clinicians.
Cardiac magnetic resonance enables comprehensive cardiac evaluation; however, intense time and labor requirements for data acquisition and processing have discouraged many clinicians from using it. We have developed an alternative image-processing algorithm that requires minimal user interaction: an ultrafast algorithm that computes left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by using temporal intensity variation in cine balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) short-axis images, with or without contrast medium. We evaluated the algorithm's performance against an expert observer's analysis for segmenting the LV cavity in 65 study participants (LVEF range, 12%-70%). In 12 instances, contrast medium was administered before cine imaging. Bland-Altman analysis revealed quantitative effects of LV basal, midcavity, and apical morphologic variation on the algorithm's accuracy. Total computation time for the LV stack was <2.5 seconds. The algorithm accurately delineated endocardial boundaries in 1,132 of 1,216 slices (93%). When contours in the extreme basal and apical slices were not adequate, they were replaced with manually drawn contours. The Bland-Altman mean differences were <1.2 mL (0.8%) for end-diastolic volume, <5 mL (6%) for end-systolic volume, and <3% for LVEF. Standard deviation of the difference was ≤4.1% of LV volume for all sections except the midcavity in end-systole (8.3% of end-systolic volume). We conclude that temporal intensity variation-based ultrafast LVEF computation is clinically accurate across a range of LV shapes and wall motions and is suitable for postcontrast cine SSFP imaging. Our algorithm enables real-time processing of cine bSSFP images on a commercial scanner console within 3 seconds in an unobtrusive automated process.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pednekar et al. (2021) studied this question. Ultrafast LVEF computation algorithm vs. Expert observer's analysis was evaluated on Accuracy of LV cavity segmentation and LVEF computation (Mean difference <3% for LVEF). An ultrafast algorithm using temporal intensity variation accurately computed LVEF compared to expert analysis, with a mean difference of <3% for LVEF and computation time under 2.5 seconds.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: