The use of dedicated long-axis views focused on the left atrium improves the accuracy of left atrial volumes and emptying fraction measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance.

BACKGROUND

The use of apical views focused on the left atrium (LA) has improved the accuracy of LA volume evaluation by two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography. However, routine cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) evaluation of LA volumes still uses standard 2- and 4-chamber cine images focused on the left ventricle (LV). To investigate the potential of LA-focused CMR cine images, we compared LA maximuml (LAVmax) and minimum (LAVmin) volumes, and emptying fraction (LAEF), calculated on both standard and LA-focused long-axis cine images, with LA volumes and LAEF obtained by short-axis cine stacks covering the LA. LA strain was also calculated and compared between standard and LA-focused images.

METHODS

LA volumes and LAEF were obtained from 108 consecutive patients by applying the biplane area-length algorithm to both standard and LA-focused 2- and 4-chamber cine images. Manual segmentation of a short-axis cine stack covering the LA was used as the reference method. In addition, LA strain reservoir (εs), conduit (εe) and booster pump (εa) were calculated using CMR feature-tracking.

RESULTS

Compared to the reference method, the standard approach significantly underestimated LA volumes (LAVmax: bias - 13 ml; LOA =  + 11, - 37 ml; LAVmax i: bias - 7 ml/m; LOA =  + 7, - 21 ml/m; LAVmin; bias - 10 ml, LOA: + 9, - 28 ml; LAVmin i: bias - 5 ml/m, LOA: + 5, - 16 ml/m), and overestimated LA-EF (bias 5%, LOA: + 23, - 14%). Conversely, LA volumes (LAVmax: bias 0 ml; LOA: + 10, - 10 ml; LAVmax i: bias 0 ml/m; LOA: + 5, - 6 ml/m; LAVmin: bias - 2 ml; LOA: + 7, - 10 ml; LAVmin i: bias - 1 ml/m; LOA: + 3, - 5 ml/m) and LAEF (bias 2%, LOA: + 11, - 7%) by LA-focused cine images were similar to those measured using the reference method. LA volumes by LA-focused images were obtained faster than using the reference method (1.2 vs 4.5 min, p < 0.001). LA strain (εs: bias 7%, LOA = 25, - 11%; εe: bias 4%, LOA = 15, - 8%; εa: bias 3%, LOA = 14, - 8%) was significantly higher in standard vs. LA-focused images (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

LA volumes and LAEF measured using dedicated LA-focused long-axis cine images are more accurate than using standard LV-focused cine images. Moreover, LA strain is significantly lower in LA-focused vs. standard images.