DeMatteis Cardiovascular Institute, St. Francis Hospital & Heart Center, 100 Port Washington Blvd, Roslyn, NY, 11576, USA.
Sol Price School of Public Policy and Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2023 Sep 21;23(1):473. doi: 10.1186/s12872-023-03426-1.
Highly accelerated compressed sensing cine has allowed for quantification of ventricular function in a single breath hold. However, compared to segmented breath hold techniques, there may be underestimation or overestimation of LV volumes. Furthermore, a heterogeneous sample of techniques have been used in volunteers and patients for pre-clinical and clinical use. This can complicate individual comparisons where small, but statistically significant differences exist in left ventricular morphological and/or functional parameters. This meta-analysis aims to provide a comparison of conventional cine versus compressed sensing based reconstruction techniques in patients and volunteers.
Two investigators performed systematic searches for eligible studies using PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science to identify studies published 1/1/2010-3/1/2021. Ultimately, 15 studies were included for comparison between compressed sensing cine and conventional imaging.
Compared to conventional cine, there were small, statistically significant overestimation of LV mass, underestimation of stroke volume and LV end diastolic volume (mean difference 2.65 g [CL 0.57-4.73], 2.52 mL [CL 0.73-4.31], and 2.39 mL [CL 0.07-4.70], respectively). Attenuated differences persisted across studies using prospective gating (underestimated stroke volume) and non-prospective gating (underestimation of stroke volume, overestimation of mass). There were no significant differences in LV volumes or LV mass with high or low acceleration subgroups in reference to conventional cine except slight underestimation of ejection fraction among high acceleration studies. Reduction in breath hold acquisition time ranged from 33 to 64%, while reduction in total scan duration ranged from 43 to 97%.
LV volume and mass assessment using compressed sensing CMR is accurate compared to conventional parallel imaging cine.
高度加速的压缩感知电影可实现单次屏气即可定量心室功能。然而，与分段屏气技术相比，LV 容积可能会被低估或高估。此外，在志愿者和患者中，为了进行临床前和临床研究，使用了各种不同的技术。这使得在左心室形态和/或功能参数存在小但具有统计学意义的差异的情况下，进行个体间比较变得复杂。本荟萃分析旨在比较患者和志愿者中常规电影与基于压缩感知的重建技术。
两位研究人员使用 PubMed/MEDLINE 和 Web of Science 进行了系统搜索，以确定 2010 年 1 月 1 日至 2021 年 3 月 1 日期间发表的研究。最终，有 15 项研究被纳入用于比较压缩感知电影与常规成像。
与常规电影相比，LV 质量有小的、统计学上显著的高估，而 LV 射血分数和 LV 舒张末期容积则有小的、统计学上显著的低估（平均差异分别为 2.65 g [CL 0.57-4.73]、2.52 mL [CL 0.73-4.31]和 2.39 mL [CL 0.07-4.70]）。使用前瞻性门控（低估射血分数）和非前瞻性门控（低估射血分数，高估质量），这些差异在不同研究中仍然存在。除了在高加速研究中轻微低估射血分数外，在高或低加速亚组中，LV 容积或 LV 质量与常规电影相比没有显著差异。屏气采集时间的减少范围为 33%至 64%，而总扫描时间的减少范围为 43%至 97%。
与常规并行成像电影相比，使用压缩感知 CMR 评估 LV 容积和质量是准确的。
