4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Analysis of three-dimensional endocardial and epicardial strains from cardiac magnetic resonance in healthy subjects and patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11517-017-1674-2

关键词

Endocardial strain; Epicardial strain; Atrioventricular junction motion; Feature tracking; Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

资金

  1. National Medical Research Council [NMRC/OFIRG/0018/2016, NMRC/EDG/1037/2011]
  2. Biomedical Research Council [14/1/32/24/002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a genetic disease that leads to left ventricle (LV) hypertrophy with or without the presence of LV outflow tract obstruction. The aim of this study was to find an easy and useful indicator based on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) images for control subjects and patients with and without obstruction. CMR scans were performed for 19 control subjects and 19 HCM patients. Endocardial strain was defined as S-endo = vertical bar ln (L-ES,L- endo /L-ED,L- endo)vertical bar x 100%, with L-ED,L- endo (L-ES,L- endo) being the length of endocardium at end-diastole (end-systole); similarly for epicardial strain (S-epi). The strains were evaluated in cine CMR two-, three-and four-chamber views. Six atrioventricular junction (AVJ) points from three CMR views were semi-automatically tracked. The peak systolic velocity (Sm1), peak early diastolic velocity and late diastolic velocity (Em, Am) were extracted and analysed. Compared with control subjects, HCM patients had significantly smaller three-dimensional strains and AVJ motion incorporating measurements from three long-axis views (all P < 0.05). Moreover, ROC analysis found that three-dimensional global epicardial strain < 17.2% had the best sensitivity 94.4% and specificity 94.7% to differentiate HCM from control (AUC = 0.97). Therefore, three-dimensional endocardial and epicardial strains provide an easy and effective approach to manage and triage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据