Goo Hyun Woo, Park Sang-Hyub
Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Dec;31 Suppl 2:223-32. doi: 10.1007/s10554-015-0751-6. Epub 2015 Aug 29.
To assess agreement between two semi-automatic, three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) ventricular volumetry methods with different user interactions in patients with congenital heart disease. In 30 patients with congenital heart disease (median age 8 years, range 5 days-33 years; 20 men), dual-source, multi-section, electrocardiography-synchronized cardiac CT was obtained at the end-systolic (n = 22) and/or end-diastolic (n = 28) phase. Nineteen left ventricle end-systolic (LV ESV), 28 left ventricle end-diastolic (LV EDV), 22 right ventricle end-systolic (RV ESV), and 28 right ventricle end-diastolic volumes (RV EDV) were successfully calculated using two semi-automatic, 3D segmentation methods with different user interactions (high in method 1, low in method 2). The calculated ventricular volumes of the two methods were compared and correlated. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. LV ESV (35.95 ± 23.49 ml), LV EDV (88.76 ± 61.83 ml), and RV ESV (46.87 ± 47.39 ml) measured by method 2 were slightly but significantly smaller than those measured by method 1 (41.25 ± 26.94 ml, 92.20 ± 62.69 ml, 53.61 ± 50.08 ml for LV ESV, LV EDV, and RV ESV, respectively; P ≤ 0.02). In contrast, no statistically significant difference in RV EDV (122.57 ± 88.57 ml in method 1, 123.83 ± 89.89 ml in method 2; P = 0.36) was found between the two methods. All ventricular volumes showed very high correlation (R = 0.978, 0.993, 0.985, 0.997 for LV ESV, LV EDV, RV ESV, and RV EDV, respectively; P < 0.001) between the two methods. In patients with congenital heart disease, 3D CT ventricular volumetry shows good agreement and high correlation between the two methods, but method 2 tends to slightly underestimate LV ESV, LV EDV, and RV ESV.
评估两种具有不同用户交互方式的半自动三维（3D）计算机断层扫描（CT）心室容积测量方法在先天性心脏病患者中的一致性。对30例先天性心脏病患者（年龄中位数8岁，范围5天至33岁；男性20例），在收缩末期（n = 22）和/或舒张末期（n = 28）阶段进行双源、多层面、心电图同步心脏CT检查。使用两种具有不同用户交互方式（方法1交互多，方法2交互少）的半自动3D分割方法成功计算出19例左心室收缩末期容积（LV ESV）、28例左心室舒张末期容积（LV EDV）、22例右心室收缩末期容积（RV ESV）和28例右心室舒张末期容积（RV EDV）。比较并关联两种方法计算出的心室容积。P值<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。方法2测得的LV ESV（35.95±23.49 ml）、LV EDV（88.76±61.83 ml）和RV ESV（46.87±47.39 ml）略小于方法1测得的值（LV ESV、LV EDV和RV ESV分别为41.25±26.94 ml、92.20±62.69 ml和53.61±50.08 ml；P≤0.02）。相比之下，两种方法在RV EDV方面未发现统计学显著差异（方法1为122.57±88.57 ml，方法2为123.83±89.89 ml；P = 0.36）。两种方法测得的所有心室容积均显示出非常高的相关性（LV ESV、LV EDV、RV ESV和RV EDV的R值分别为0.978、0.993、0.985和0.997；P < 0.001）。在先天性心脏病患者中，3D CT心室容积测量显示两种方法之间具有良好的一致性和高度相关性，但方法2往往会略微低估LV ESV、LV EDV和RV ESV。
