Comparison of magnetic resonance feature tracking for systolic and diastolic strain and strain rate calculation with spatial modulation of magnetization imaging analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Comparison of magnetic resonance feature tracking for systolic and diastolic strain and strain rate calculation with spatial modulation of magnetization imaging analysis. / Moody, William E.; Taylor, Robin J.; Edwards, Nicola C.; Chue, Colin D.; Umar, Fraz; Taylor, Tiffany J.; Ferro, Charles J.; Young, Alistair A.; Townend, Jonathan N.; Leyva, F.; Steeds, Richard P.

In: Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 41, No. 4, 19.03.2015, p. 1000–1012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{24c2d9f8aa5f4bfb8b2dae335db5b027,
title = "Comparison of magnetic resonance feature tracking for systolic and diastolic strain and strain rate calculation with spatial modulation of magnetization imaging analysis",
abstract = "PurposeTo compare cardiovascular magnetic resonance-feature tracking (CMR-FT) with spatial modulation of magnetization (SPAMM) tagged imaging for the calculation of short and long axis Lagrangian strain measures in systole and diastole.Materials and MethodsHealthy controls (n = 35) and patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (n = 10) were identified prospectively and underwent steady-state free precession (SSFP) cine imaging and SPAMM imaging using a gradient-echo sequence. A timed offline analysis of images acquired at identical horizontal long and short axis slice positions was performed using CMR-FT and dynamic tissue-tagging (CIMTag2D). Agreement between strain and strain rate (SR) values calculated using these two different methods was assessed using the Bland–Altman technique.ResultsAcross all participants, there was good agreement between CMR-FT and CIMTag for calculation of peak systolic global circumferential strain (−22.7 ± 6.2% vs. −22.5 ± 6.9%, bias 0.2 ± 4.0%) and SR (−1.35 ± 0.42 1/s vs. −1.22 ± 0.42 1/s, bias 0.13 ± 0.33 1/s) and early diastolic global circumferential SR (1.21 ± 0.44 1/s vs. 1.07 ± 0.30 1/s, bias −0.14 ± 0.34 1/s) at the subendocardium. There was satisfactory agreement for derivation of peak systolic global longitudinal strain (−18.1 ± 5.0% vs. −16.7 ± 4.8%, bias 1.3 ± 3.8%) and SR (−1.04 ± 0.29 1/s vs. −0.95 ± 0.32 1/s, bias 0.09 ± 0.26 1/s). The weakest agreement was for early diastolic global longitudinal SR (1.10 ± 0.40 1/s vs. 0.67 ± 0.32 1/s, bias −0.42 ± 0.40 1/s), although the correlation remained significant (r = 0.42, P < 0.01). CMR-FT generated these data over four times quicker than CIMTag.ConclusionThere is sufficient agreement between systolic and diastolic strain measures calculated using CMR-FT and myocardial tagging for CMR-FT to be considered as a potentially feasible and rapid alternative.",
keywords = "cine magnetic resonance imaging, left ventricular function, tagging, feature tracking",
author = "Moody, {William E.} and Taylor, {Robin J.} and Edwards, {Nicola C.} and Chue, {Colin D.} and Fraz Umar and Taylor, {Tiffany J.} and Ferro, {Charles J.} and Young, {Alistair A.} and Townend, {Jonathan N.} and F. Leyva and Steeds, {Richard P.}",
year = "2015",
month = mar,
day = "19",
doi = "10.1002/jmri.24623",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "1000–1012",
journal = "Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging",
issn = "1053-1807",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of magnetic resonance feature tracking for systolic and diastolic strain and strain rate calculation with spatial modulation of magnetization imaging analysis

AU - Moody, William E.

AU - Taylor, Robin J.

AU - Edwards, Nicola C.

AU - Chue, Colin D.

AU - Umar, Fraz

AU - Taylor, Tiffany J.

AU - Ferro, Charles J.

AU - Young, Alistair A.

AU - Townend, Jonathan N.

AU - Leyva, F.

AU - Steeds, Richard P.

PY - 2015/3/19

Y1 - 2015/3/19

N2 - PurposeTo compare cardiovascular magnetic resonance-feature tracking (CMR-FT) with spatial modulation of magnetization (SPAMM) tagged imaging for the calculation of short and long axis Lagrangian strain measures in systole and diastole.Materials and MethodsHealthy controls (n = 35) and patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (n = 10) were identified prospectively and underwent steady-state free precession (SSFP) cine imaging and SPAMM imaging using a gradient-echo sequence. A timed offline analysis of images acquired at identical horizontal long and short axis slice positions was performed using CMR-FT and dynamic tissue-tagging (CIMTag2D). Agreement between strain and strain rate (SR) values calculated using these two different methods was assessed using the Bland–Altman technique.ResultsAcross all participants, there was good agreement between CMR-FT and CIMTag for calculation of peak systolic global circumferential strain (−22.7 ± 6.2% vs. −22.5 ± 6.9%, bias 0.2 ± 4.0%) and SR (−1.35 ± 0.42 1/s vs. −1.22 ± 0.42 1/s, bias 0.13 ± 0.33 1/s) and early diastolic global circumferential SR (1.21 ± 0.44 1/s vs. 1.07 ± 0.30 1/s, bias −0.14 ± 0.34 1/s) at the subendocardium. There was satisfactory agreement for derivation of peak systolic global longitudinal strain (−18.1 ± 5.0% vs. −16.7 ± 4.8%, bias 1.3 ± 3.8%) and SR (−1.04 ± 0.29 1/s vs. −0.95 ± 0.32 1/s, bias 0.09 ± 0.26 1/s). The weakest agreement was for early diastolic global longitudinal SR (1.10 ± 0.40 1/s vs. 0.67 ± 0.32 1/s, bias −0.42 ± 0.40 1/s), although the correlation remained significant (r = 0.42, P < 0.01). CMR-FT generated these data over four times quicker than CIMTag.ConclusionThere is sufficient agreement between systolic and diastolic strain measures calculated using CMR-FT and myocardial tagging for CMR-FT to be considered as a potentially feasible and rapid alternative.

AB - PurposeTo compare cardiovascular magnetic resonance-feature tracking (CMR-FT) with spatial modulation of magnetization (SPAMM) tagged imaging for the calculation of short and long axis Lagrangian strain measures in systole and diastole.Materials and MethodsHealthy controls (n = 35) and patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (n = 10) were identified prospectively and underwent steady-state free precession (SSFP) cine imaging and SPAMM imaging using a gradient-echo sequence. A timed offline analysis of images acquired at identical horizontal long and short axis slice positions was performed using CMR-FT and dynamic tissue-tagging (CIMTag2D). Agreement between strain and strain rate (SR) values calculated using these two different methods was assessed using the Bland–Altman technique.ResultsAcross all participants, there was good agreement between CMR-FT and CIMTag for calculation of peak systolic global circumferential strain (−22.7 ± 6.2% vs. −22.5 ± 6.9%, bias 0.2 ± 4.0%) and SR (−1.35 ± 0.42 1/s vs. −1.22 ± 0.42 1/s, bias 0.13 ± 0.33 1/s) and early diastolic global circumferential SR (1.21 ± 0.44 1/s vs. 1.07 ± 0.30 1/s, bias −0.14 ± 0.34 1/s) at the subendocardium. There was satisfactory agreement for derivation of peak systolic global longitudinal strain (−18.1 ± 5.0% vs. −16.7 ± 4.8%, bias 1.3 ± 3.8%) and SR (−1.04 ± 0.29 1/s vs. −0.95 ± 0.32 1/s, bias 0.09 ± 0.26 1/s). The weakest agreement was for early diastolic global longitudinal SR (1.10 ± 0.40 1/s vs. 0.67 ± 0.32 1/s, bias −0.42 ± 0.40 1/s), although the correlation remained significant (r = 0.42, P < 0.01). CMR-FT generated these data over four times quicker than CIMTag.ConclusionThere is sufficient agreement between systolic and diastolic strain measures calculated using CMR-FT and myocardial tagging for CMR-FT to be considered as a potentially feasible and rapid alternative.

KW - cine magnetic resonance imaging

KW - left ventricular function

KW - tagging

KW - feature tracking

U2 - 10.1002/jmri.24623

DO - 10.1002/jmri.24623

M3 - Article

C2 - 24677420

VL - 41

SP - 1000

EP - 1012

JO - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

JF - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

SN - 1053-1807

IS - 4

ER -