ArticleLa Radiologia medica2020
Left ventricular global myocardial strain assessment: Are CMR feature-tracking algorithms useful in the clinical setting?
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis for the value of cardiac magnetic resonance strain to predict cardiac outcomes.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for discrimination of hypertensive heart disease and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Imaging of metabolic and overload disorders in tissues and organs.Japanese journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Appraising Myocardial Strain and Biomechanics: A Current Overview.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Heart Failure and Cardiomyopathies: CT and MR from Basics to Advanced Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- A head-to-head comparison of fast-SENC and feature tracking to LV long axis strain for assessment of myocardial deformation in chest pain patients.BMC medical imaging · 2022Article
- FLORA software: semi-automatic LGE-CMR analysis tool for cardiac lesions identification and characterization.La Radiologia medica · 2022Article
- Artificial intelligence study on left ventricular function among normal individuals, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and dilated cardiomyopathy patients using 1.5T cardiac cine MR images obtained by SSFP sequence.The British journal of radiology · 2022Article
- Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging: state of the art and applications in whole-body imaging.Japanese journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Stress Perfusion Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in Long-Standing Non-Infarcted Chronic Coronary Syndrome with Preserved Systolic Function.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Real-world clinical validity of cardiac magnetic resonance tissue tracking in primitive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.La Radiologia medica · 2021Article
- Assessment of long-term cardiac adaptation in adult patients with type II atrial septal defect : A cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) study.European radiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesMyocardial strains can be calculated using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) feature-tracking (FT) algorithms. They show excellent intra- and inter-observer agreement but rather disappointing inter-vendor agreement. Currently, it is unknown how well CMR-FT-based strain values agree with manually obtained strain values.
methodsIn 45 subjects (15 controls, 15 acute myocardial infarction, 15 non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy), end-systolic manually derived strains were compared to four CMR-FT software packages. Global radial strain (GRS), global circumferential strain (GCS) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) were determined. Intra- and inter-observer agreement and agreement between manual and CMR-FT analysis were calculated. Statistical analysis included Bland-Altman plots, intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV).
resultsManual contouring yielded excellent intra-observer (ICC 0.903 (GRS) to 0.995 (GCS)) and inter-observer agreement (ICC 0.915 (GRS) to 0.966 (GCS)) with CV ranging 4.7% (GCS) to 20.7% (GRS) and 12.7% (GCS) to 20.0% (GRS), for intra-observer and inter-observer agreement, respectively. Agreement between manual and CMR-FT strain values ranged from poor to excellent, with best agreement for GCS (ICC 0.857-0.935) and intermediate for GLS (ICC 0.591-0.914), while ICC values for GRS ranged widely (ICC 0.271-0.851). In particular, two software packages showed a strong trend toward systematic underestimation of myocardial strain in radial and longitudinal direction, correlating poorly to moderately with manual contouring, i.e., GRS (ICC 0.271, CV 25.2%) and GLS (ICC 0.591, CV 17.6%).
conclusionSome CMR-FT values agree poorly with manually derived strains, emphasizing to be cautious to use these software packages in the clinical setting. In particular, radial and longitudinal strain tends to be underestimated when using manually derived strains as reference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32125636What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.