Left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) analysis is a sensitive measurement of myocardial deformation most often done using speckle-tracking transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). We... Show moreLeft ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) analysis is a sensitive measurement of myocardial deformation most often done using speckle-tracking transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). We propose a novel approach to measure LVGLS using feature-tracking software on the magnitude dataset of 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and compare it to dynamic computed tomography (CT) and speckle tracking TTE derived measurements. In this prospective cohort study 59 consecutive adult patients with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) were included. The study protocol consisted of TTE, CT, and CMR on the same day. Image analysis was done using dedicated feature-tracking (4D flow CMR and CT) and speckle-tracking (TTE) software, on apical 2-, 3-, and 4-chamber long-axis multiplanar reconstructions (4D flow CMR and CT) or standard apical 2-, 3-, and 4-chamber acquisitions (TTE). CMR and CT GLS analysis was feasible in all patients. Good correlations were observed for GLS measured by CMR (- 21 +/- 3%) and CT (- 20 +/- 3%) versus TTE (- 20 +/- 3%, Pearson's r: 0.67 and 0.65, p < 0.001). CMR also correlated well with CT (Pearson's r 0.62, p < 0.001). The inter-observer analysis showed moderate to good reproducibility of GLS measurement by CMR, CT and TTE (Pearsons's r: 0.51, 0.77, 0.70 respectively; p < 0.05). Additionally, ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic and end-systolic volume measurements (EDV and ESV) correlated well between all modalities (Pearson's r > 0.61, p < 0.001). Feature-tracking GLS analysis is feasible using the magnitude images acquired with 4D flow CMR. GLS measurement by CMR correlates well with CT and speckle-tracking 2D TTE. GLS analysis on 4D flow CMR allows for an integrative approach, integrating flow and functional data in a single sequence. Not applicable, observational study. Show less
Background: No established reference-standard technique is available for ascending aortic diameter measurements. The aim of this study was to determine agreement between modalities and techniques... Show moreBackground: No established reference-standard technique is available for ascending aortic diameter measurements. The aim of this study was to determine agreement between modalities and techniques.Methods: In patients with aortic pathology transthoracic echocardiography, computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) were performed. Aortic diameters were measured at the sinus of Valsalva (SoV), sinotubular junction (STJ) and tubular ascending aorta (TAA) during mid-systole and end-diastole. In echocardiography both the inner edge-to-inner edge (14 edge) and leading edge-to-leading edge (L-L edge) methods were applied, and the length of the aortic annulus to the most cranial visible part of the ascending aorta was measured. In CTA and MRA the I-1 method was used.Results: Fifty patients with bicuspid aortic valve (36 +/- 13 years, 26' female) and 50 Turner patients (35 +/- 13 years) were included. Comparison of all aortic measurements showed a mean difference of 5.4 +/- 2.7 mm for the SoV, 5.1 +/- 2.0 mm for the STJ and 4.8 +/- 2.1 mm for the TAA. The maximum difference was 18 mm. The best agreement was found between echocardiography L-L edge and CTA during mid-systole. CTA and MRA showed good agreement. A mean difference of 1.5 +/- 1.3 mm and 1.8 +/- 1.5 mm was demonstrated at the level of the STJ and TAA comparing mid-systolic with end-diastolic diameters. The visible length of the aorta increased on average 5.3 +/- 5.1 mmW during mid-systole.Conclusions: MRA and CTA showed best agreement with L-L edge method by echocardiography. In individual patients large differences in ascending aortic diameter were demonstrated, warranting measurement standardization. The use of CIA or MRA is advised at least once. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Show less
