Gufler Hubert, Wagner Sabine, Niefeldt Sabine, Klopsch Christian, Brill Richard, Wohlgemuth Walter Alexander, Yerebakan Can
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Clinic, Rostock, Germany.
Clinic and Policlinic of Diagnostic Radiology, Martin-Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, 01620, Germany.
Acta Radiol. 2020 Jul;61(7):894-902. doi: 10.1177/0284185119886318. Epub 2019 Nov 21.
Pressure-volume analysis is the gold standard for quantifying pump function of the right ventricle (RV); however, volume measurements based on a conductive catheter may be imprecise. The reference method for volume assessment is cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).
To determine the levels of agreement between RV volume measurements obtained by cine CMR, phase-contrast CMR (PC CMR), and a conductance catheter in an animal model.
CMR was performed in 20 sheep three months after pulmonary artery banding. Ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic (EDV), end-systolic (ESV), and stroke volumes (SV) were obtained by cine CMR and conductance catheter.
Statistically significant differences between cine CMR and conductance catheter derived volume measurements were found for EDV ( < 0.001), ESV ( < 0.05), and SV ( < 0.05). Bland-Altman analysis showed very poor agreement between the two methods: EDV, bias 36.27 mL, agreement of limits 1.96-70.57 mL; ESV, bias 15.33 mL, agreement of limits -6.89-37.55 mL; and SV, bias 20.69 mL, agreement of limits 8.01-49.10 mL. Good agreement was found for SV between cine CMR and PC CMR (bias -7.0 mL, agreement of limits -24.01-9.98 mL), while SV derived from PC CMR measurements showed poor agreement with conductance catheter (bias 27.76 mL, agreement of limits -3.84-59.26 mL).
Poor agreement between the conductance catheter and CMR RV volume measurements was found. PC CMR and cine CMR measurements of SV agreed well.
压力-容积分析是量化右心室（RV）泵功能的金标准；然而，基于导电导管的容积测量可能不准确。容积评估的参考方法是心脏磁共振成像（CMR）。
确定在动物模型中，电影CMR、相位对比CMR（PC CMR）和导电导管所获得的RV容积测量值之间的一致性水平。
对20只绵羊在肺动脉束带术后三个月进行CMR检查。通过电影CMR和导电导管获得射血分数（EF）、舒张末期容积（EDV）、收缩末期容积（ESV）和每搏量（SV）。
电影CMR和导电导管得出的容积测量值在EDV（<0.001）、ESV（<0.05）和SV（<0.05）方面存在统计学显著差异。Bland-Altman分析显示两种方法之间的一致性非常差：EDV，偏差36.27 mL，一致性界限1.96 - 70.57 mL；ESV，偏差15.33 mL，一致性界限-6.89 - 37.55 mL；SV，偏差20.69 mL，一致性界限8.01 - 49.10 mL。电影CMR和PC CMR在SV方面一致性良好（偏差-7.0 mL，一致性界限-24.01 - 9.98 mL），而PC CMR测量得出的SV与导电导管一致性较差（偏差27.76 mL，一致性界限-3.84 - 59.26 mL）。
发现导电导管与CMR RV容积测量之间一致性较差。PC CMR和电影CMR对SV的测量一致性良好。
