Suppr超能文献

不同厂商间的应变测量值的变异性取决于软件而非图像特征。

Inter-vendor variability in strain measurements depends on software rather than image characteristics.

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, University Hospital Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Department of Cardiology, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.

出版信息

Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021 May;37(5):1689-1697. doi: 10.1007/s10554-020-02155-2. Epub 2021 Jan 16.

Abstract

Despite standardization efforts, vendors still use specific proprietary software algorithms for echocardiographic strain measurements, which result in high inter-vendor variability. Using vendor-independent software could be one solution. Little is known, however, how vendor specific image characteristics can influence tracking results of such software. We therefore investigated the reproducibility, accuracy, and scar detection ability of strain measurements on images from different vendors by using a vendor-independent software. A vendor-independent software (TomTec Image Arena) was used to analyse datasets of 63 patients which were obtained on machines from four different ultrasound machine vendors (GE, Philips, Siemens, Toshiba). We measured the tracking feasibility, inter-vendor bias, the relative test-re-test variability and scar discrimination ability of strain measurements. Cardiac magnetic resonance delayed enhancement images were used as the reference standard of scar definition. Tracking feasibility on vendor datasets were significantly different (p < 0.001). Variability of global longitudinal strain (GLS) measurements was similar among the vendors whereas variability of segmental longitudinal strain (SLS) showed modest difference. Relative test-re-test variability of GLS and SLS showed no relevant differences. No significant difference in scar detection capability was observed. Average GLS and SLS values were similar among vendors. Reproducibility of GLS measurements showed no difference among vendors and was in acceptable range. SLS reproducibility was high but similar for all vendors. No relevant difference was found for identifying regional dysfunction. Tracking feasibility showed a substantial difference among images from different vendors. Our findings demonstrate that tracking results depend mainly on the software used and show little influence from vendor specific image characteristics.

摘要

尽管已经进行了标准化工作,但供应商仍然使用特定的专有软件算法进行超声心动图应变测量,这导致了各供应商之间的高度变异性。使用独立于供应商的软件可能是一种解决方案。然而,对于供应商特定的图像特征如何影响这种软件的跟踪结果,人们知之甚少。因此,我们使用独立于供应商的软件研究了不同供应商的图像的应变测量的可重复性、准确性和疤痕检测能力。使用独立于供应商的软件(TomTec Image Arena)分析了来自四个不同超声机器供应商(GE、Philips、Siemens、Toshiba)的机器获得的 63 名患者的数据集。我们测量了应变测量的跟踪可行性、供应商之间的偏差、相对测试-再测试变异性和疤痕区分能力。心脏磁共振延迟增强图像被用作疤痕定义的参考标准。在供应商数据集上的跟踪可行性有显著差异(p<0.001)。各供应商之间的整体纵向应变(GLS)测量的变异性相似,而节段性纵向应变(SLS)的变异性则存在适度差异。GLS 和 SLS 的相对测试-再测试变异性没有明显差异。在疤痕检测能力方面没有观察到显著差异。各供应商之间的平均 GLS 和 SLS 值相似。GLS 测量的重复性在各供应商之间没有差异,且处于可接受范围内。SLS 的重复性很高,但对所有供应商都是相似的。在识别区域性功能障碍方面没有发现明显差异。来自不同供应商的图像的跟踪可行性存在很大差异。我们的研究结果表明,跟踪结果主要取决于所使用的软件,并且来自供应商特定的图像特征的影响很小。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验