Synthetic Extracellular Volume Fraction As an Imaging Biomarker of the Myocardial Interstitium without Blood Sampling: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
{"title":"Synthetic Extracellular Volume Fraction As an Imaging Biomarker of the Myocardial Interstitium without Blood Sampling: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Naofumi Yasuda, Shingo Kato, Nobuyuki Horita, Ryusuke Sekii, Shungo Sawamura, Hiroaki Nagase, Daisuke Utsunomiya","doi":"10.1016/j.jocmr.2025.101889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The calculation of conventional extracellular volume fraction (ECV) requires blood hematocrit (Hct) measurement. Based on the relationship between Hct and blood T1 relaxivity for cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), a synthetic ECV could be estimated without a blood sampling. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation and agreement in the quantification of synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV from conventional Hct measurements.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic database searches of PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane advanced search, and EMBASE were performed. The authors employed a meta-analysis using the generic inverse variance method with a random-effects model to estimate the summary correlation coefficient and mean absolute difference between synthetic and laboratory ECV.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 38 papers, 10 studies comprising 4,492 patients were identified. Overall, there was an excellent correlation between synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV (0.95 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.92 to 0.97]) at 1.5T CMR and (0.91 [95% CI: 0.86 to 0.94]) at 3.0T CMR. The pooled mean difference between synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV was 0.61% (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.98%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, p for heterogeneity = 0.67) at 1.5T CMR and 0.24% (95% CI: -0.13 to 0.61%, I<sup>2</sup> = 19%, p for heterogeneity = 0.25) at 3.0T CMR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study is the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of Synthetic ECV evaluation at CMR. Synthetic ECV demonstrated an excellent correlation with laboratory ECV, with a mean difference of less than 1%, and offers non-invasive and instantaneous quantification of the myocardial extracellular space without the need for blood sampling.</p>","PeriodicalId":15221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance","volume":" ","pages":"101889"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocmr.2025.101889","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The calculation of conventional extracellular volume fraction (ECV) requires blood hematocrit (Hct) measurement. Based on the relationship between Hct and blood T1 relaxivity for cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), a synthetic ECV could be estimated without a blood sampling. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation and agreement in the quantification of synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV from conventional Hct measurements.
Methods: Electronic database searches of PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane advanced search, and EMBASE were performed. The authors employed a meta-analysis using the generic inverse variance method with a random-effects model to estimate the summary correlation coefficient and mean absolute difference between synthetic and laboratory ECV.
Results: Of 38 papers, 10 studies comprising 4,492 patients were identified. Overall, there was an excellent correlation between synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV (0.95 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.92 to 0.97]) at 1.5T CMR and (0.91 [95% CI: 0.86 to 0.94]) at 3.0T CMR. The pooled mean difference between synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV was 0.61% (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.98%, I2 = 0%, p for heterogeneity = 0.67) at 1.5T CMR and 0.24% (95% CI: -0.13 to 0.61%, I2 = 19%, p for heterogeneity = 0.25) at 3.0T CMR.
Conclusions: This study is the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of Synthetic ECV evaluation at CMR. Synthetic ECV demonstrated an excellent correlation with laboratory ECV, with a mean difference of less than 1%, and offers non-invasive and instantaneous quantification of the myocardial extracellular space without the need for blood sampling.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) publishes high-quality articles on all aspects of basic, translational and clinical research on the design, development, manufacture, and evaluation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) methods applied to the cardiovascular system. Topical areas include, but are not limited to:
New applications of magnetic resonance to improve the diagnostic strategies, risk stratification, characterization and management of diseases affecting the cardiovascular system.
New methods to enhance or accelerate image acquisition and data analysis.
Results of multicenter, or larger single-center studies that provide insight into the utility of CMR.
Basic biological perceptions derived by CMR methods.