Comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction
Abstract Background Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial strain analysis using feature tracking (FT) is an increasingly popular method to assess cardiac function. However, different software packages produce different strain values from the same images and there is little guidance rega...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2021-05-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-021-00747-y |
| _version_ | 1827280956451454976 |
|---|---|
| author | Ying Zhang David Mui Julio A. Chirinos Payman Zamani Victor A. Ferrari Yucheng Chen Yuchi Han |
| author_facet | Ying Zhang David Mui Julio A. Chirinos Payman Zamani Victor A. Ferrari Yucheng Chen Yuchi Han |
| author_sort | Ying Zhang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial strain analysis using feature tracking (FT) is an increasingly popular method to assess cardiac function. However, different software packages produce different strain values from the same images and there is little guidance regarding which software package would be the best to use. We explored a framework under which different software packages could be compared and used based on their abilities to differentiate disease from health and differentiate disease severity based on outcome. Method To illustrate this concept, we compared 4-chamber left ventricular (LV) peak longitudinal strain (GLS) analyzed from retrospective electrocardiogram gated cine imaging performed on 1.5 T CMR scanners using three CMR post-processing software packages in their abilities to discriminate a group of 45 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) from 26 controls without cardiovascular disease and to discriminate disease severity based on outcomes. The three different post-processing software used were SuiteHeart, cvi42, and DRA-Trufistrain. Results All three software packages were able to distinguish HFpEF patients from controls. 4-chamber peak GLS by SuiteHeart was shown to be a better discriminator of adverse outcomes in HFpEF patients than 4-chamber GLS derived from cvi42 or DRA-Trufistrain. Conclusion We illustrated a framework to compare feature tracking GLS derived from different post-processing software packages. Publicly available imaging data sets with outcomes would be important to validate the growing number of CMR-FT software packages. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T08:49:55Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7d85424e0be948bca15c693e86fd7f45 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1532-429X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T08:49:55Z |
| publishDate | 2021-05-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance |
| spelling | doaj.art-7d85424e0be948bca15c693e86fd7f452024-04-16T12:14:37ZengElsevierJournal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance1532-429X2021-05-0123111010.1186/s12968-021-00747-yComparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fractionYing Zhang0David Mui1Julio A. Chirinos2Payman Zamani3Victor A. Ferrari4Yucheng Chen5Yuchi Han6Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaPerelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaCardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaCardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaCardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaDepartment of Cardiology, West China HospitalCardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaAbstract Background Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) myocardial strain analysis using feature tracking (FT) is an increasingly popular method to assess cardiac function. However, different software packages produce different strain values from the same images and there is little guidance regarding which software package would be the best to use. We explored a framework under which different software packages could be compared and used based on their abilities to differentiate disease from health and differentiate disease severity based on outcome. Method To illustrate this concept, we compared 4-chamber left ventricular (LV) peak longitudinal strain (GLS) analyzed from retrospective electrocardiogram gated cine imaging performed on 1.5 T CMR scanners using three CMR post-processing software packages in their abilities to discriminate a group of 45 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) from 26 controls without cardiovascular disease and to discriminate disease severity based on outcomes. The three different post-processing software used were SuiteHeart, cvi42, and DRA-Trufistrain. Results All three software packages were able to distinguish HFpEF patients from controls. 4-chamber peak GLS by SuiteHeart was shown to be a better discriminator of adverse outcomes in HFpEF patients than 4-chamber GLS derived from cvi42 or DRA-Trufistrain. Conclusion We illustrated a framework to compare feature tracking GLS derived from different post-processing software packages. Publicly available imaging data sets with outcomes would be important to validate the growing number of CMR-FT software packages.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-021-00747-yFeature trackingPost-processingCMRHFpEFStrainSoftware package comparison |
| spellingShingle | Ying Zhang David Mui Julio A. Chirinos Payman Zamani Victor A. Ferrari Yucheng Chen Yuchi Han Comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Feature tracking Post-processing CMR HFpEF Strain Software package comparison |
| title | Comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction |
| title_full | Comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction |
| title_fullStr | Comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction |
| title_short | Comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction |
| title_sort | comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance strain software packages by their abilities to discriminate outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction |
| topic | Feature tracking Post-processing CMR HFpEF Strain Software package comparison |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-021-00747-y |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yingzhang comparingcardiovascularmagneticresonancestrainsoftwarepackagesbytheirabilitiestodiscriminateoutcomesinpatientswithheartfailurewithpreservedejectionfraction AT davidmui comparingcardiovascularmagneticresonancestrainsoftwarepackagesbytheirabilitiestodiscriminateoutcomesinpatientswithheartfailurewithpreservedejectionfraction AT julioachirinos comparingcardiovascularmagneticresonancestrainsoftwarepackagesbytheirabilitiestodiscriminateoutcomesinpatientswithheartfailurewithpreservedejectionfraction AT paymanzamani comparingcardiovascularmagneticresonancestrainsoftwarepackagesbytheirabilitiestodiscriminateoutcomesinpatientswithheartfailurewithpreservedejectionfraction AT victoraferrari comparingcardiovascularmagneticresonancestrainsoftwarepackagesbytheirabilitiestodiscriminateoutcomesinpatientswithheartfailurewithpreservedejectionfraction AT yuchengchen comparingcardiovascularmagneticresonancestrainsoftwarepackagesbytheirabilitiestodiscriminateoutcomesinpatientswithheartfailurewithpreservedejectionfraction AT yuchihan comparingcardiovascularmagneticresonancestrainsoftwarepackagesbytheirabilitiestodiscriminateoutcomesinpatientswithheartfailurewithpreservedejectionfraction |