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...
Saved in:
Published in: | PloS one 2014-10, Vol.9 (10), p.e109164-e109164 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
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!
|
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 |