Key result
MR strain analysis outperforms WT analysis in detecting dysfunctional myocardium with ~92% sensitivity.
Why the study?
Does MR strain analysis improve the detection of dysfunctional myocardium compared to wall thickening analysis in patients with myocardial infarction?
Observational (n=26)
Does MR strain analysis improve the detection of dysfunctional myocardium compared to wall thickening analysis in patients with myocardial infarction?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
MR tissue tagging with strain analysis is more accurate than planar wall thickening analysis for discriminating dysfunctional from functional myocardium after myocardial infarction.
OBJECTIVES: Using two-dimensional wall thickening (WT) (expressed as percentage) and strain analysis, regional contractile myocardial function was quantified and compared in 13 control subjects and 13 patients with a first myocardial infarction (MI). The findings in the patient group were related to global ventricular function and infarct size. BACKGROUND: In patients with coronary artery disease, regions with dysfunctional myocardium cannot be differentiated easily from regions with normal function by planar WT analysis. Physiologic factors, in combination with limitations of conventional imaging techniques, affect the calculation of WT. Quantitative assessment of contractile function by magnetic resonance (MR) tissue tagging and strain analysis may be less affected by these factors. METHODS: Two-dimensional regional WT and strain were calculated in three short-axis MR cine and tagged images, respectively. Left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction (EF) were obtained from a series of contiguous short-axis cine images. RESULTS: In patients with infarct-related ventricles, WT and strain analysis both revealed reduced myocardial function, as compared with control subjects (p < 0.005 and p < 0.001, respectively). However, WT analysis yielded no significant regional differences in function between infarct-related and remote myocardium (p = 0.064), whereas strain analysis did (p < 0.005). For detecting dysfunctional myocardium of electrocardiographically and angiographically defined infarct areas, WT analysis had a sensitivity of 69% and a specificity of 92%, whereas strain analysis demonstrated a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 99%. The EF correlated with WT (r = 0.76, p < 0.005) and strain (r = 0.89, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Two-dimensional strain analysis is more accurate than planar WT analysis in discriminating dysfunctional from functional myocardium, and it provides a strong correlation between regional myocardial and global ventricular function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Götte et al. (2001) conducted an observational in First myocardial infarction (n=26). Magnetic resonance tissue tagging and strain analysis vs. Two-dimensional wall thickening (WT) analysis was evaluated on Sensitivity for detecting dysfunctional myocardium of electrocardiographically and angiographically defined infarct areas (p=<0.005). Magnetic resonance strain analysis was more accurate than wall thickening analysis in discriminating dysfunctional from functional myocardium, with 92% sensitivity and 99% specificity.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: