Compressed sensing cardiac MRI accurately assessed left ventricular volume and mass compared to conventional cine, with only small overestimations of LV mass and underestimations of stroke volume.
Meta-Analysis (n=691)
Does compressed sensing cine cardiac magnetic resonance accurately measure left ventricular volumes and mass compared to conventional segmented cine in patients and volunteers?
Compressed sensing cardiac magnetic resonance provides accurate left ventricular volume and mass assessments with significantly reduced scan and breath-hold times compared to conventional segmented cine.
Effect estimate: Mean difference 2.65 g (95% CI 0.57-4.73)
p-value: p=0.012
PURPOSE: Highly accelerated compressed sensing cine has allowed for quantification of ventricular function in a single breath hold. However, compared to segmented breath hold techniques, there may be underestimation or overestimation of LV volumes. Furthermore, a heterogeneous sample of techniques have been used in volunteers and patients for pre-clinical and clinical use. This can complicate individual comparisons where small, but statistically significant differences exist in left ventricular morphological and/or functional parameters. This meta-analysis aims to provide a comparison of conventional cine versus compressed sensing based reconstruction techniques in patients and volunteers. METHODS: Two investigators performed systematic searches for eligible studies using PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science to identify studies published 1/1/2010-3/1/2021. Ultimately, 15 studies were included for comparison between compressed sensing cine and conventional imaging. RESULTS: Compared to conventional cine, there were small, statistically significant overestimation of LV mass, underestimation of stroke volume and LV end diastolic volume (mean difference 2.65 g CL 0.57-4.73, 2.52 mL CL 0.73-4.31, and 2.39 mL CL 0.07-4.70, respectively). Attenuated differences persisted across studies using prospective gating (underestimated stroke volume) and non-prospective gating (underestimation of stroke volume, overestimation of mass). There were no significant differences in LV volumes or LV mass with high or low acceleration subgroups in reference to conventional cine except slight underestimation of ejection fraction among high acceleration studies. Reduction in breath hold acquisition time ranged from 33 to 64%, while reduction in total scan duration ranged from 43 to 97%. CONCLUSION: LV volume and mass assessment using compressed sensing CMR is accurate compared to conventional parallel imaging cine.
Craft et al. (Thu,) conducted a meta-analysis in Left ventricular volume and function assessment (n=691). Compressed sensing (CS) cardiac cine MRI vs. Conventional segmented bSSFP cardiac cine MRI was evaluated on Left ventricular mass (LVM) difference (Mean difference 2.65 g, 95% CI 0.57-4.73, p=0.012). Compressed sensing cardiac MRI accurately assessed left ventricular volume and mass compared to conventional cine, with only small overestimations of LV mass and underestimations of stroke volume.