Loading…

Quantification of left ventricular torsion and diastolic recoil using cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature tracking (CMR-FT) offers quantification of myocardial deformation from routine cine images. However, data using CMR-FT to quantify left ventricular (LV) torsion and diastolic recoil are not yet available. We therefore sought to evaluate the feasibility and r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2014-10, Vol.9 (10), p.e109164-e109164
Main Authors: Kowallick, Johannes T, Lamata, Pablo, Hussain, Shazia T, Kutty, Shelby, Steinmetz, Michael, Sohns, Jan M, Fasshauer, Martin, Staab, Wieland, Unterberg-Buchwald, Christina, Bigalke, Boris, Lotz, Joachim, Hasenfuß, Gerd, Schuster, Andreas
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature tracking (CMR-FT) offers quantification of myocardial deformation from routine cine images. However, data using CMR-FT to quantify left ventricular (LV) torsion and diastolic recoil are not yet available. We therefore sought to evaluate the feasibility and reproducibility of CMR-FT to quantify LV torsion and peak recoil rate using an optimal anatomical approach. Short-axis cine stacks were acquired at rest and during dobutamine stimulation (10 and 20 µg · kg(-1) · min(-1)) in 10 healthy volunteers. Rotational displacement was analysed for all slices. A complete 3D-LV rotational model was developed using linear interpolation between adjacent slices. Torsion was defined as the difference between apical and basal rotation, divided by slice distance. Depending on the distance between the most apical (defined as 0% LV distance) and basal (defined as 100% LV distance) slices, four different models for the calculation of torsion were examined: Model-1 (25-75%), Model-2 (0-100%), Model-3 (25-100%) and Model-4 (0-75%). Analysis included subendocardial, subepicardial and global torsion and recoil rate (mean of subendocardial and subepicardial values). Quantification of torsion and recoil rate was feasible in all subjects. There was no significant difference between the different models at rest. However, only Model-1 (25-75%) discriminated between rest and stress (Global Torsion: 2.7 ± 1.5° cm(-1), 3.6 ± 2.0° cm(-1), 5.1 ± 2.2° cm(-1), p
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0109164