On the Concordance Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Computed Tomography for Left Heart Function Assessment.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
James W Goldfarb
{"title":"On the Concordance Between Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Computed Tomography for Left Heart Function Assessment.","authors":"James W Goldfarb","doi":"10.1097/RCT.0000000000001855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the agreement between cardiac computed tomography (CCT) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) for measuring left ventricular (LV) and left atrial (LA) function, and to evaluate the influence of segmentation approach and volume calculation method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 24 patients (mean age 74.2±10.9 y; 54% male) who underwent CMR and multiphase CCT within 14 days. LV and LA end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), ejection fraction (EF), and LV mass were measured using CCT voxel-based volumetry with papillary-inclusion (PIS) and exclusion (PES) segmentations and then compared with CMR. Simulations of Simpson's Area-Length (AL) and Disk-Summation (DS) techniques were performed on reformatted CCT images using increasing slice spacings (1 to 32 mm). Agreement was evaluated using correlation coefficients, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), percent error, and Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CCT demonstrated excellent correlation with CMR for LV-EDV, ESV, EF, and mass (r=0.82 to 0.98; ICC=0.72 to 0.94). PES yielded no EF bias, while PIS overestimated EF by 7.0%. LV mass was consistently overestimated by 39 to 52 g ( P <0.01). LA volumes showed moderate-to-strong correlation (r=0.70 to 0.90), but poor-to-moderate agreement (ICC=0.21 to 0.55). Simulated LA Simpson-DS measurements with slice spacings ≤8 mm preserved agreement with voxel-based values (ICC ≥0.99).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CCT can accurately assess LV function when compared with CMR when using voxel-based methods and consistent papillary segmentation approaches. Biplane and measurements with wide slice spacings reduce agreement, warranting standardization for clinical interchangeability.</p>","PeriodicalId":15402,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography","volume":" ","pages":"606-615"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000001855","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the agreement between cardiac computed tomography (CCT) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) for measuring left ventricular (LV) and left atrial (LA) function, and to evaluate the influence of segmentation approach and volume calculation method.

Methods: This retrospective study included 24 patients (mean age 74.2±10.9 y; 54% male) who underwent CMR and multiphase CCT within 14 days. LV and LA end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), ejection fraction (EF), and LV mass were measured using CCT voxel-based volumetry with papillary-inclusion (PIS) and exclusion (PES) segmentations and then compared with CMR. Simulations of Simpson's Area-Length (AL) and Disk-Summation (DS) techniques were performed on reformatted CCT images using increasing slice spacings (1 to 32 mm). Agreement was evaluated using correlation coefficients, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), percent error, and Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: CCT demonstrated excellent correlation with CMR for LV-EDV, ESV, EF, and mass (r=0.82 to 0.98; ICC=0.72 to 0.94). PES yielded no EF bias, while PIS overestimated EF by 7.0%. LV mass was consistently overestimated by 39 to 52 g ( P <0.01). LA volumes showed moderate-to-strong correlation (r=0.70 to 0.90), but poor-to-moderate agreement (ICC=0.21 to 0.55). Simulated LA Simpson-DS measurements with slice spacings ≤8 mm preserved agreement with voxel-based values (ICC ≥0.99).

Conclusions: CCT can accurately assess LV function when compared with CMR when using voxel-based methods and consistent papillary segmentation approaches. Biplane and measurements with wide slice spacings reduce agreement, warranting standardization for clinical interchangeability.

心脏磁共振与计算机体层摄影在左心功能评估中的一致性研究。
目的:评价心脏计算机断层扫描(CCT)与心脏磁共振(CMR)测量左室(LV)和左房(LA)功能的一致性,并评价分割方法和体积计算方法的影响。方法:本回顾性研究纳入24例患者(平均年龄74.2±10.9岁,男性54%),均在14天内行CMR和多期CCT。采用CCT体素容积法测量左室和左室舒张末期容积(EDV)、收缩末期容积(ESV)、射血分数(EF)和左室质量,并与CMR进行比较。模拟辛普森的面积-长度(AL)和磁盘-求和(DS)技术在重新格式化的CCT图像上使用增加切片间距(1至32 mm)。使用相关系数、类内相关系数(ICC)、错误率和Bland-Altman分析来评估一致性。结果:CCT显示LV-EDV、ESV、EF和质量与CMR有很好的相关性(r=0.82 ~ 0.98; ICC=0.72 ~ 0.94)。PES没有产生EF偏差,而PIS高估了7.0%的EF。结论:当使用基于体素的方法和一致的乳头状分割方法时,与CMR相比,CCT可以准确地评估左室功能。双翼和宽片间距的测量减少了一致性,保证了临床互换性的标准化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
230
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography is to showcase the latest clinical and research developments in CT, MR, and closely related diagnostic techniques. We encourage submission of both original research and review articles that have immediate or promissory clinical applications. Topics of special interest include: 1) functional MR and CT of the brain and body; 2) advanced/innovative MRI techniques (diffusion, perfusion, rapid scanning); and 3) advanced/innovative CT techniques (perfusion, multi-energy, dose-reduction, and processing).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书