Comparison of semi-automated methods to quantify infarct size and area at risk by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5T and 3.0T field strengths

BMC Research Notes

Gerry P McCann¹  Anthony H Gershlick¹  John P Greenwood²  Prathap Kanagala¹  Anvesha Singh¹  Mark A Horsfield¹  Sheraz A Nazir¹  Jamal N Khan¹ 

[1] Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester and the NIHR Leicester Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester, LE3 9QP, UK;Division of Cardiovascular and Diabetes Research, Leeds Institute of Genetics, Health and Therapeutics, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

关键词: Ischaemic area at risk;    Myocardial oedema;    Myocardial salvage;    T2-weighted STIR;    Infarct size;    Late gadolinium enhancement;    Myocardial infarction;   

Others  :  1131668
DOI  :  10.1186/s13104-015-1007-1

 received in 2014-06-30, accepted in 2015-02-09,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

There is currently no gold standard technique for quantifying infarct size (IS) and ischaemic area-at-risk (AAR [oedema]) on late gadolinium enhancement imaging (LGE) and T2-weighted short tau inversion recovery imaging (T2w-STIR) respectively. This study aimed to compare the accuracy and reproducibility of IS and AAR quantification on LGE and T2w-STIR imaging using Otsu’s Automated Technique (OAT) with currently used methods at 1.5T and 3.0T post acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

Methods

Ten patients were assessed at 1.5T and 10 at 3.0T. IS was assessed on LGE using 5–8 standard-deviation thresholding (5-8SD), full-width half-maximum (FWHM) quantification and OAT. AAR was assessed on T2w-STIR using 2SD and OAT. Accuracy was assessed by comparison with manual quantification. Interobserver and intraobserver variabilities were assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients and Bland-Altman analysis. IS using each technique was correlated with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

Results

FWHM and 8SD-derived IS closely correlated with manual assessment at both field strengths (1.5T: 18.3 ± 10.7% LV Mass [LVM] with FWHM, 17.7 ± 14.4% LVM with 8SD, 16.5 ± 10.3% LVM with manual quantification; 3.0T: 10.8 ± 8.2% LVM with FWHM, 11.4 ± 9.0% LVM with 8SD, 11.5 ± 9.0% LVM with manual quantification). 5SD and OAT overestimated IS at both field strengths. OAT, 2SD and manually quantified AAR closely correlated at 1.5T, but OAT overestimated AAR compared with manual assessment at 3.0T. IS and AAR derived by FWHM and OAT respectively had better reproducibility compared with manual and SD-based quantification. FWHM IS correlated strongest with LVEF.

Conclusions

FWHM quantification of IS is accurate, reproducible and correlates strongly with LVEF, whereas 5SD and OAT overestimate IS. OAT accurately assesses AAR at 1.5T and with excellent reproducibility. OAT overestimated AAR at 3.0T and thus cannot be recommended as the preferred method for AAR quantification at 3.0T.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Khan et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Klem I, Shah DJ, White RD, Pennell DJ, van Rossum AC, Regenfus M, et al.: Prognostic value of routine cardiac magnetic resonance assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction and myocardial damage: an international, multicenter study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2011, 4:610-9.
• [2]Hombach V, Grebe O, Merkle N, Waldenmaier S, Höher M, Kochs M, et al.: Sequelae of acute myocardial infarction regarding cardiac structure and function and their prognostic significance as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Heart J 2005, 26:549-57.
• [3]Masci PG, Ganame J, Strata E, Desmet W, Aquaro GD, Dymarkowski S, et al.: Myocardial Salvage by CMR Correlates With LV Remodeling and Early ST-Segment Resolution in Acute Myocardial Infarction. JCMG 2010, 3:45-51.
• [4]Eitel I, Desch S, de Waha S, Fuernau G, Gutberlet M, Schuler G, et al.: Long-term prognostic value of myocardial salvage assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance in acute reperfused myocardial infarction. Heart (British Cardiac Soc) 2011, 97:2038-45.
• [5]Pennell D: Myocardial salvage: retrospection, resolution, and radio waves. Circulation 2006, 113:1821-3.
• [6]Flett AS, Hasleton J, Cook C, Hausenloy D, Quarta G, Ariti C, et al.: Evaluation of techniques for the quantification of myocardial scar of differing etiology using cardiac magnetic resonance. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2011, 4:150-6.
• [7]Kim RJ, Fieno DS, Parrish TB, Harris K, Chen E-l, Simonetti O, et al.: Relationship of MRI Delayed Contrast Enhancement to Irreversible Injury, Infarct Age, and Contractile Function. Circulation 1999, 100:1992-2002.
• [8]Amado LC, Gerber BL, Gupta SN, Rettmann DW, Szarf G, Schock R, et al.: Accurate and objective infarct sizing by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in a canine myocardial infarction model. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 44:2383-9.
• [9]Hsu LY, Natanzon A, Kellman P, Hirsch GA, Aletras AH, Arai AE: Quantitative myocardial infarction on delayed enhancement MRI. Part I: animal validation of an automated feature analysis and combined thresholding infarct sizing algorithm. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006, 23:298-308.
• [10]Johnstone RI, Greenwood JP, Biglands JD, Plein S, Ridgway JP, Radjenovic A: Assessment of tissue edema in patients with acute myocardial infarction by computer-assisted quantification of triple inversion recovery prepared MRI of the myocardium. Magn Reson Med 2011, 66:564-73.
• [11]Otsu N: A Threshold Selection Method from Gray-Level Histograms. IEEE Trans Sys Man Cybern 1979, 5MC-9:62-6.
• [12]Vermes E, Childs H, Carbone I, Barckow P, Friedrich M: Auto-Threshold Quantification of Late Gadolinium Enhancement in Patients With Acute Heart Disease. JMRI 2013, 37:382-90.
• [13]Sjogren J, Ubachs JF, Engblom H, Carlsson M, Arheden H, Heiberg E: Semi-automatic segmentation of myocardium at risk in T2-weighted cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2012, 14:10. BioMed Central Full Text
• [14]McAlindon E, Lawton C, Flett AS, Manghat N, Hamilton MC, Bucciarelli Ducci C: Evaluation of 7 techniques for the quantification of myocardial oedema in STEMI. JCMR 2013, 15:P188.
• [15]Haahr M. Random.org (True Random Number Generator). http://www.random.org 1998, Website (Accessed September 2013).
• [16]Kelly DJ, McCann GP, Blackman D, Curzen NP, Dalby M, Greenwood JP, et al.: Complete Versus culprit-Lesion only PRimary PCI Trial (CVLPRIT): a multicentre trial testing management strategies when multivessel disease is detected at the time of primary PCI: rationale and design. EuroIntervention 2013, 8:1190-8.
• [17]Nazir S, Khan JN, Mahmoud IZ, Greenwood JP, Blackman D, Kunadian V, et al.: The REFLO-STEMI trial comparing intracoronary adenosine, sodium nitroprusside and standard therapy for the attenuation of infarct size and microvascular obstruction during primary percutaneous coronary intervention: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2014, 15:371. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]Steg PG, James SK, Atar D, Badano LP, Lundqvist CB, Borger MA, et al.: ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with STsegment elevation: The Task Force on the management of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2012, 33(20):2569-619.
• [19]Heiberg E, Engblom H, Engvall J, Hedstrom E, Ugander M, Arheden H: Semi-automatic quantification of myocardial infarction from delayed contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Scand Cardiovasc J 2005, 39:267-75.
• [20]Hsu LY, Ingkanisorn WP, Kellman P, Aletras AH, Arai AE: Quantitative myocardial infarction on delayed enhancement MRI. Part II: Clinical application of an automated feature analysis and combined thresholding infarct sizing algorithm. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006, 23:309-14.
• [21]Gao H, Kadir K, Payne AR, Soraghan J, Berry C: Highly automatic quantification of myocardial oedema in patients with acute myocardial infarction using bright blood T2-weighted CMR. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2013, 15:28. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]Kadir K, Gao H, Payne A, Soraghan J, Berry C: Automatic quantification and 3D visualisation of edema in cardiac MRI. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2011, 2011:8021-4.
• [23]McGraw KO, Wong SP: Forming Inferences About Some Intraclass Correlation Coefficients. Psychol Methods 1996, 1:30-46.
• [24]Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 1:307-10.
• [25]Castillo E, Osman NF, Rosen BD, El-Shehaby I, Pan L, Jerosch-Herold M, et al.: Quantitative assessment of regional myocardial function with MR-tagging in a multi-center study: interobserver and intraobserver agreement of fast strain analysis with Harmonic Phase (HARP) MRI. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2005, 7:783-91.
• [26]Mather AN, Fairbairn TA, Artis NJ, Greenwood JP: Timing of Cardiovascular MR Imaging after Acute Myocardial Infarction : Effect on Estimates of Infarct Characteristics and Prediction of Late Ventricular Remodeling. Radiology 2011, 261:116-26.
• [27]Dall’Armellina E, Karia N, Lindsay AC, Karamitsos TD, Ferreira V, Robson MD, et al.: Dynamic changes of edema and late gadolinium enhancement after acute myocardial infarction and their relationship to functional recovery and salvage index. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2011, 4:228-36.
• [28]Kim HW, Farzaneh-Far A, Kim RJ: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with myocardial infarction: current and emerging applications. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009, 55:1-16.
• [29]Bondarenko O, Beek AM, Hofman MB, Kuhl HP, Twisk JW, van Dockum WG, et al.: Standardizing the definition of hyperenhancement in the quantitative assessment of infarct size and myocardial viability using delayed contrast-enhanced CMR. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2005, 7:481-5.
• [30]Ibrahim T, Hackl T, Nekolla SG, Breuer M, Feldmair M, Schömig A: Acute Myocardial Infarction : Serial Cardiac MR Imaging Shows a Decrease in Delayed Enhancement of the Myocardium during the 1st Week after Reperfusion. Radiology 2010, 254:88-97.
• [31]Wu E, Ortiz JT, Tejedor P, Lee DC, Kansal P, Carr JC, et al.: Infarct size by contrast enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance is a stronger predictor of outcomes than left ventricular ejection fraction or end-systolic volume index : prospective cohort study Infarct size by contrast enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance i. Heart 2008, 94:730-6.
• [32]Aletras AH, Tilak GS, Natanzon A, Hsu L-Y, Gonzalez FM, Hoyt RF, et al.: Retrospective determination of the area at risk for reperfused acute myocardial infarction with T2-weighted cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: histopathological and displacement encoding with stimulated echoes (DENSE) functional validations. Circulation 2006, 113:1865-70.
• [33]OH-Ici D, Ridgway JP, Kuehne T, Berger F, Plein S, Sivananthan M, et al.: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance of myocardial edema using a short inversion time inversion recovery (STIR) black-blood technique: Diagnostic accuracy of visual and semi-quantitative assessment. JCMR 2012, 14:22.
• [34]Friedrich MG, Abdel-Aty H, Taylor A, Schulz-Menger J, Messroghli D, Dietz R: The salvaged area at risk in reperfused acute myocardial infarction as visualized by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008, 51:1581-7.