Advertisement

Comparing a novel automatic 3D method for LGE-CMR quantification of scar size with established methods

  • Leik Woie
  • Frode Måløy
  • Trygve Eftestøl
  • Kjersti Engan
  • Thor Edvardsen
  • Jan Terje Kvaløy
  • Stein Ørn
Original Paper

Abstract

Current methods for the estimation of infarct size by late-enhanced cardiac magnetic imaging are based upon 2D analysis that first determines the size of the infarction in each slice, and thereafter adds the infarct sizes from each slice to generate a volume. We present a novel, automatic 3D method that estimates infarct size by a simultaneous analysis of all pixels from all slices. In a population of 54 patients with ischemic scars, the infarct size estimated by the automatic 3D method was compared with four established 2D methods. The new 3D method defined scar as the sum of all pixels with signal intensity (SI) ≥35 % of max SI from the complete myocardium, border zone: SI 35–50 % of max SI and core as SI ≥50 % of max SI. The 3D method yielded smaller infarct size (−2.8 ± 2.3 %) and core size (−3.0 ± 1.7 %) than the 2D method most similar to ours. There was no difference in the size of the border zone (0.2 ± 1.4 %). The 3D method demonstrated stronger correlations between scar size and left ventricular (LV) remodelling parameters (LV ejection fraction: r = −0.71, p < 0.0005, LV end-diastolic index: r = 0.54, p < 0.0005, and LV end-systolic index: r = 0.59, p < 0.0005) compared with conventional 2D methods. Infarct size estimation by our novel 3D automatic method is without the need for manual demarcation of the scar; it is less time-consuming and has a stronger correlation with remodelling parameters compared with existing methods.

Keywords

Cardiac magnetic resonance Late gadolinium enhancement Quantification Myocardial infarction Scar 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge Fredrikke Wick (RT), Kurt Tjelta (RN), Torbjørn Aarsland (RN), Ole Jacob Greve (MD) for their important contributions to this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Ørn S, Manhenke C, Greve OJ, Larsen AI, Bonarjee VVS, Edvardsen T, Dickstein K (2009) Microvascular obstruction is a major determinant of infarct healing and subsequent left ventricular remodelling following primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Eur Heart J 30:1978–1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mewton N, Ying LC, Pierre C, Bluemke D, Joao L (2011) Assessment of myocardial fibrosis with cardiac magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol 57:891–903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee DC, Goldberger JJ (2013) CMR for sudden cardiac death risk stratification: are we there yet? J Am Coll Cardiol Imaging 3:345–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Roes SD, Borleffs CJW, van der Geest RJ, Westenberg JJM, Marsan NA, Kaandorp TAM, Reiber JHC, Zeppenfeld K, Lamb HJ, de Roos A, Schalij MJ, Bax JJ (2009) Infarct tissue heterogeneity assessed with contrast-enhanced MRI predicts spontaneous ventricular arrhythmia in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2:183–190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Woie L, Eftestøl T, Engan K, Kvaløy JT, Nilsen DW, Ørn S (2011) The heart rate of ventricular tachycardia following an old myocardial infarction is inversely related to the size of scarring. Europace 13:864–868PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yan AT, Shayne AJ, Brown KA, Gupta SN, Chan CW, Luu TM, Di Carli MF, Reynolds HG, Stevenson WG, Kwong EY (2006) Characterization of the peri-infarct zone by contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging is a powerful predictor of post-myocardial infarction mortality. Circulation 114:32–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schmidt A, Azevedo CF, Cheng A, Gupta SN, Bluemke DA, Foo TK, Gerstenblith G, Weiss RG, Marban E, Tomaselli GF, Lima JA, Wu KC (2007) Infarct tissue heterogeneity by magnetic resonance imaging identifies enhanced cardiac arrhythmia susceptibility in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 115:2006–2014PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Altman DG, Bland JM (1983) Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. Statistician 32:307–317. doi: 10.2307/2987937 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amado LC, Gerber BL, Gupta SN, Rettmann DW, Szarf G, Schock R, Nasir K, Kraitchman DL, Lima JAC (2004) Accurate and objective infarct sizing by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in a canine myocardial infarction model. J Am Coll Cardiol 44:2383–2389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leik Woie
    • 1
    • 5
  • Frode Måløy
    • 2
  • Trygve Eftestøl
    • 2
  • Kjersti Engan
    • 2
  • Thor Edvardsen
    • 3
  • Jan Terje Kvaløy
    • 4
  • Stein Ørn
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of CardiologyStavanger University HospitalStavangerNorway
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway
  3. 3.Department of Cardiology, Oslo University Hospital, RikshospitaletUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  4. 4.Department of Mathematics and Natural SciencesUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway
  5. 5.StavangerNorway

Personalised recommendations