COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Knowledge-based reconstruction of right ventricular volumes using real-time three-dimensional echocardiographic as well as cardiac magnetic resonance images: comparison with a cardiac magnetic resonance standard

Kai Thorsten Laser, Jan-Pit Horst, Peter Barth, Andrea Kelter-Klöpping, Nikolaus Alexander Haas, Wolfgang Burchert, Deniz Kececioglu, Hermann Körperich
Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography 2014, 27 (10): 1087-97
24969839

BACKGROUND: Right ventricular volume quantification using real-time three-dimensional echocardiographic (RT3DE) imaging is limited by technical shortcomings of acquisition and quantification. In this study, a two-step approach was used to overcome these limitations. First, a modified acquisition technique for RT3DE imaging was applied, and second, a software tool using knowledge-based reconstruction (KBR) was used. The approach was validated against the gold standard, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging, using CMR and RT3DE data sets from healthy children and from patients with congenital heart disease.

METHODS: Sixty individuals (20 healthy persons, 40 with congenital heart defects; age range, 2.3-43.9 years; median age, 11.3 years) consecutively underwent investigation by CMR and RT3DE imaging. CMR data sets were first quantified by the method of disks (MOD) as the standard. Then CMR and RT3DE data sets were quantified using KBR software and compared with the MOD.

RESULTS: CMR was more feasible than echocardiography (100% vs 88%). Compared with the MOD (CMRMOD), there were trivial volume overestimations of KBR for CMR data (CMRKBR), of end-diastolic volume (EDV) (-1.3 ± 8.6%, r = 0.984) and end-systolic volume (ESV) (-3.4 ± 13.3%, r = 0.985), resulting in a 0.7 ± 8.7% difference in ejection fraction (EF) (r = 0.882). Comparing CMRMOD and RT3DE imaging, EDV (1.1 ± 7.4%, r = 0.990) and EF (0.8 ± 9.2%, r = 0.871) were slightly underestimated by RT3DE imaging, with a slight overestimation of ESV (-1.5 ± 13.3%, r = 0.977). Intraobserver variability was excellent for KBR of CMR and RT3DE data, with interclass coefficients of correlation of 0.995 and 0.997 for EDV, 0.995 and 0.994 for ESV, and 0.915 and 0.912 for EF. Interobserver variability provided intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.992 and 0.990 for EDV, 0.997 and 0.992 for ESV, and 0.953 and 0.933 for EF. The KBR analysis required a mean time of 5 min.

CONCLUSIONS: KBR is an accurate, versatile, and time-saving method for right ventricular three-dimensional volumetry; it shows excellent reproducibility for RT3DE and CMR data sets. These results suggest that this tool is clinically valuable.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
24969839
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"