Myocardial Scar Detection Using High-Resolution Free-Breathing 3D Dark-Blood and Standard Breath-Holding 2D Bright-Blood Late Gadolinium Enhancement MRI: A Comparison of Observer Confidence.

Q2 Medicine Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pub Date : 2023-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-16 DOI:10.1097/RMR.0000000000000304
Hedwig M J M Nies, Bibi Martens, Suzanne Gommers, Geertruida P Bijvoet, Joachim E Wildberger, Rachel M A Ter Bekke, Robert J Holtackers, Casper Mihl
{"title":"Myocardial Scar Detection Using High-Resolution Free-Breathing 3D Dark-Blood and Standard Breath-Holding 2D Bright-Blood Late Gadolinium Enhancement MRI: A Comparison of Observer Confidence.","authors":"Hedwig M J M Nies,&nbsp;Bibi Martens,&nbsp;Suzanne Gommers,&nbsp;Geertruida P Bijvoet,&nbsp;Joachim E Wildberger,&nbsp;Rachel M A Ter Bekke,&nbsp;Robert J Holtackers,&nbsp;Casper Mihl","doi":"10.1097/RMR.0000000000000304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare observer confidence for myocardial scar detection using 3 different late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) data sets by 2 observers with different levels of experience.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Forty-one consecutive patients, who were referred for 3D dark-blood LGE MRI before implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation or ablation therapy and who underwent 2D bright-blood LGE MRI within a time frame of 3 months, were prospectively included. From all 3D dark-blood LGE data sets, a stack of 2D short-axis slices was reconstructed. All acquired LGE data sets were anonymized and randomized and evaluated by 2 independent observers with different levels of experience in cardiovascular imaging (beginner and expert). Confidence in detection of ischemic scar, nonischemic scar, papillary muscle scar, and right ventricular scar for each LGE data set was scored using a using a 3-point Likert scale (1 = low, 2 = medium, or 3 = high). Observer confidence scores were compared using the Friedman omnibus test and Wilcoxon signed-rank post hoc test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For the beginner observer, a significant difference in confidence regarding ischemic scar detection was observed in favor of reconstructed 2D dark-blood LGE compared with standard 2D bright-blood LGE (p = 0.030) while for the expert observer, no significant difference was found (p = 0.166). Similarly, for right ventricular scar detection, a significant difference in confidence was observed in favor of reconstructed 2D dark-blood LGE compared with standard 2D bright-blood LGE (p = 0.006) while for the expert observer, no significant difference was found (p = 0.662). Although not significantly different for other areas of interest, 3D dark-blood LGE and its derived 2D dark-blood LGE data set showed a tendency to score higher for all areas of interest at both experience levels.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The combination of dark-blood LGE contrast and high isotropic voxels may contribute to increased observer confidence in myocardial scar detection, independent of observer's experience level but in particular for beginner observers.</p>","PeriodicalId":39381,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging","volume":"32 3","pages":"27-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/1d/7d/tmri-32-27.PMC10510822.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RMR.0000000000000304","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare observer confidence for myocardial scar detection using 3 different late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) data sets by 2 observers with different levels of experience.

Materials and methods: Forty-one consecutive patients, who were referred for 3D dark-blood LGE MRI before implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation or ablation therapy and who underwent 2D bright-blood LGE MRI within a time frame of 3 months, were prospectively included. From all 3D dark-blood LGE data sets, a stack of 2D short-axis slices was reconstructed. All acquired LGE data sets were anonymized and randomized and evaluated by 2 independent observers with different levels of experience in cardiovascular imaging (beginner and expert). Confidence in detection of ischemic scar, nonischemic scar, papillary muscle scar, and right ventricular scar for each LGE data set was scored using a using a 3-point Likert scale (1 = low, 2 = medium, or 3 = high). Observer confidence scores were compared using the Friedman omnibus test and Wilcoxon signed-rank post hoc test.

Results: For the beginner observer, a significant difference in confidence regarding ischemic scar detection was observed in favor of reconstructed 2D dark-blood LGE compared with standard 2D bright-blood LGE (p = 0.030) while for the expert observer, no significant difference was found (p = 0.166). Similarly, for right ventricular scar detection, a significant difference in confidence was observed in favor of reconstructed 2D dark-blood LGE compared with standard 2D bright-blood LGE (p = 0.006) while for the expert observer, no significant difference was found (p = 0.662). Although not significantly different for other areas of interest, 3D dark-blood LGE and its derived 2D dark-blood LGE data set showed a tendency to score higher for all areas of interest at both experience levels.

Conclusions: The combination of dark-blood LGE contrast and high isotropic voxels may contribute to increased observer confidence in myocardial scar detection, independent of observer's experience level but in particular for beginner observers.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用高分辨率自由呼吸3D暗血和标准屏息2D亮血晚期钆增强MRI检测心肌瘢痕:观察者置信度的比较。
目的:比较2名具有不同经验的观察者使用3种不同的延迟钆增强(LGE)数据集检测心肌瘢痕的观察者置信度。材料和方法:前瞻性纳入41名连续患者,他们在植入心律转复除颤器或消融治疗前接受了3D暗血LGE MRI检查,并在3个月内接受了2D亮血LGE核磁共振检查。根据所有3D暗血LGE数据集,重建了一堆2D短轴切片。所有获得的LGE数据集都是匿名和随机的,并由2名在心血管成像方面具有不同经验水平的独立观察者(初学者和专家)进行评估。使用三点Likert量表(1=低、2=中或3=高)对每个LGE数据集的缺血性瘢痕、非缺血性瘢痕、乳头肌瘢痕和右心室瘢痕的检测置信度进行评分。使用Friedman综合检验和Wilcoxon符号秩后检验比较观察者的置信度得分。结果:对于初学者观察者,与标准2D亮血LGE相比,重建的2D暗血LGE在缺血性瘢痕检测方面的置信度存在显著差异(p=0.030),而对于专家观察者,没有发现显著差异(p=0.166)。类似地,对于右心室瘢痕检测,与标准2D亮血LGE相比,观察到有利于重建的2D暗血LGE的置信度存在显著差异(p=0.006),而对于专家观察者,没有发现显著差异(p=0.662)。尽管在其他感兴趣的领域没有显著差异,3D暗血LGE及其衍生的2D暗血LGE数据集显示,在两个体验水平上,所有感兴趣的领域都有得分更高的趋势。结论:暗血LGE对比度和高各向同性体素的结合可能有助于提高观察者对心肌瘢痕检测的信心,这与观察者的经验水平无关,尤其是对于初学者观察者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging is a leading information resource for professionals in the MRI community. This publication supplies authoritative, up-to-the-minute coverage of technical advances in this evolving field as well as practical, hands-on guidance from leading experts. Six times a year, TMRI focuses on a single timely topic of interest to radiologists. These topical issues present a variety of perspectives from top radiological authorities to provide an in-depth understanding of how MRI is being used in each area.
期刊最新文献
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings of Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorder: A Pictorial Review. Anxiety of Patients Undergoing Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): The Effectiveness of Guided Mental Imagery. Deep Learning Reconstruction of Accelerated MRI: False-Positive Cartilage Delamination Inserted in MRI Arthrography Under Traction. Abnormal Development of the Corpus Callosum in Autism Spectrum Disorder: An MRI Study. Multiple Ring-Enhancing Brain Lesions: Fulminant Diffuse Cerebral Toxoplasmosis or Cerebral Metastases?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1