Michler Kerstin, Hessman Christopher, Prümmer Marcus, Achenbach Stephan, Uder Michael, Janka Rolf
Faculty of Medicine, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), 91054 Erlangen, Germany.
Institute of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 91054 Erlangen, Germany.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Apr 17;13(8):1437. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13081437.
(1) Background: With the conventional contour surface method (KfM) for the evaluation of cardiac function parameters, the papillary muscle is considered to be part of the left ventricular volume. This systematic error can be avoided with a relatively easy-to-implement pixel-based evaluation method (PbM). The objective of this thesis is to compare the KfM and the PbM with regard to their difference due to papillary muscle volume exclusion. (2) Material and Methods: In the retrospective study, 191 cardiac-MR image data sets (126 male, 65 female; median age 51 years; age distribution 20-75 years) were analysed. The left ventricular function parameters: end-systolic volume (ESV), end-diastolic volume (EDV), ejection fraction (EF) and stroke volume (SV) were determined using classical KfW (syngo.via and cvi42 = gold standard) and PbM. Papillary muscle volume was calculated and segmented automatically via cvi42. The time required for evaluation with the PbM was collected. (3) Results: The size of EDV was 177 mL (69-444.5 mL) [average, [minimum-maximum]], ESV was 87 mL (20-361.4 mL), SV was 88 mL and EF was 50% (13-80%) in the pixel-based evaluation. The corresponding values with cvi42 were EDV 193 mL (89-476 mL), ESV 101 mL (34-411 mL), SV 90 mL and EF 45% (12-73%) and syngo.via: EDV 188 mL (74-447 mL), ESV 99 mL (29-358 mL), SV 89 mL (27-176 mL) and EF 47% (13-84%). The comparison between the PbM and KfM showed a negative difference for end-diastolic volume, a negative difference for end-systolic volume and a positive difference for ejection fraction. No difference was seen in stroke volume. The mean papillary muscle volume was calculated to be 14.2 mL. The evaluation with PbM took an average of 2:02 min. (4) Conclusion: PbM is easy and fast to perform for the determination of left ventricular cardiac function. It provides comparable results to the established disc/contour area method in terms of stroke volume and measures "true" left ventricular cardiac function while omitting the papillary muscles. This results in an average 6% higher ejection fraction, which can have a significant influence on therapy decisions.
(1) 背景:使用传统的轮廓表面法(KfM)评估心功能参数时,乳头肌被视为左心室容积的一部分。采用一种相对易于实施的基于像素的评估方法(PbM)可避免这种系统误差。本论文的目的是比较KfM和PbM在排除乳头肌容积方面的差异。(2) 材料与方法:在这项回顾性研究中,分析了191份心脏磁共振图像数据集(126名男性,65名女性;年龄中位数51岁;年龄分布20 - 75岁)。使用经典的KfW(syngo.via和cvi42 = 金标准)和PbM测定左心室功能参数:收缩末期容积(ESV)、舒张末期容积(EDV)、射血分数(EF)和每搏输出量(SV)。通过cvi42自动计算并分割乳头肌容积。记录使用PbM进行评估所需的时间。(3) 结果:基于像素的评估中,EDV大小为177 mL(69 - 444.5 mL)[平均值,[最小值 - 最大值]],ESV为87 mL(20 - 361.4 mL),SV为88 mL,EF为50%(13 - 80%)。cvi42对应的数值为EDV 193 mL(89 - 476 mL),ESV 101 mL(34 - 411 mL),SV 90 mL,EF 45%(12 - 73%);syngo.via的数值为:EDV 188 mL(74 - 447 mL),ESV 99 mL(29 - 358 mL),SV 89 mL(27 - 176 mL),EF 47%(13 - 84%)。PbM与KfM之间的比较显示,舒张末期容积存在负差异,收缩末期容积存在负差异,射血分数存在正差异。每搏输出量未见差异。计算得出平均乳头肌容积为14.2 mL。使用PbM进行评估平均耗时2分02秒。(4) 结论:PbM用于测定左心室心功能简便快捷。在每搏输出量方面,它与既定的圆盘/轮廓面积法提供可比结果,且在测量“真实”左心室心功能时省略了乳头肌。这导致射血分数平均提高6%,这可能对治疗决策产生重大影响。