应变率和应变的自动分析：可行性及临床意义。
Automated analysis of strain rate and strain: feasibility and clinical implications.
作者信息
Ingul Charlotte Bjork, Torp Hans, Aase Svein Arne, Berg Sigrid, Stoylen Asbjorn, Slordahl Stig A
机构信息
Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Tronsheim, Norway.
出版信息
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2005 May;18(5):411-8. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2005.01.032.
BACKGROUND
This study evaluated 3 new automated methods, based on a combination of speckle tracking and tissue Doppler, for the analysis of strain rate (SR) and strain. Feasibility and values for peak systolic strain rate (SR s ) and end-systolic strain (S es ) were assessed.
METHODS
Thirty patients with myocardial infarction and 30 normal subjects were examined. Customized software with automatic definition of segments was used for automated measurements. SR s and SR es were measured over each segment simultaneously and identified automatically. The study compared tissue Doppler-based SR and strain measurements without (method 1) and with segment tracking (method 2) to speckle tracking-based measurements (method 3). For tracking, speckle tracking and tissue Doppler were used in combination. Standard manual analysis was used as a reference.
RESULTS
The automated analysis (16 segments, 3 apical views) required 2 minutes; manual analysis took 11 minutes. Accuracy was compared in 56 segments (28 mid-infarcted and 28 normal) from 28 patients and was 93.9% for method 1, 93.8% for method 2, 95.8% for method 3, and 96.2% for the manual method. In the normal group, mean SR s (0.27 s -1 ) was less with method 3 than with the other methods ( P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings indicate that automated analysis of SR and strain, with some manual adjustment, is feasible and quicker than manual analysis. Diagnostic accuracy was similar with all methods. SR s was lower in the speckle tracking-based method than in the Doppler-based methods.
背景
本研究评估了基于散斑追踪和组织多普勒相结合的3种新的自动化方法，用于分析应变率（SR）和应变。评估了峰值收缩期应变率（SR s）和收缩末期应变（S es）的可行性和数值。
方法
对30例心肌梗死患者和30名正常受试者进行检查。使用具有自动定义节段功能的定制软件进行自动化测量。同时在每个节段上测量SR s和SR es并自动识别。本研究将基于组织多普勒的无节段追踪（方法1）和有节段追踪（方法2）的SR和应变测量与基于散斑追踪的测量（方法3）进行了比较。对于追踪，将散斑追踪和组织多普勒结合使用。采用标准手动分析作为参考。
结果
自动化分析（16个节段，3个心尖视图）需要2分钟；手动分析需要11分钟。对28例患者的56个节段（28个梗死中部节段和28个正常节段）的准确性进行了比较，方法1为93.9%，方法2为93.8%，方法3为95.8%，手动方法为96.2%。在正常组中，方法3的平均SR s（0.27 s -1）低于其他方法（P < .001）。
结论
我们的研究结果表明，在进行一些手动调整的情况下，SR和应变的自动化分析是可行的，并且比手动分析更快。所有方法的诊断准确性相似。基于散斑追踪的方法中的SR s低于基于多普勒的方法。
Zotero 插件