6-020 Test-retest repeatability of free-breathing real-time cine cardiac MRI in patients with suspected coronary artery disease – A prospective comparative study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is established as the reference standard for cardiac volumetric assessment. Despite its accuracy and robustness, steady-state free precession (SSFP) cine imaging may prove challenging in patients with arrhythmia or in those who cannot perform repeated breath holds. An alternative method is a free-breathing real-time cine sequence. We have previously demonstrated good-excellent agreement of this technique in 202 clinical patients compared to standard SSFP in the same sitting.1 However, the repeatability of real-time cine between studies is unknown. This is pertinent for assessing serial changes in cardiac function following therapeutic interventions such as drug/device therapy or revascularisation. In this study, we investigated the repeatability of real-time cine imaging in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods In this single-centre, prospective study, consecutive adults with suspected CAD underwent two research 3-Tesla CMR scans on different days. Subjects underwent a free-breathing, multi-slice, electrocardiogram-triggered, retrogated, real-time cine sequence that acquired an entire left ventricular (LV) short-axis stack in approximately 1 minute. Short-axis image dataset pairs were separated and blindly analysed using cvi42 software (Circle Cardiovascular Imaging, Calgary, Canada). Volumetric assessment utilised the cvi42 automated contouring tool with visual inspection and adjustments when necessary. LV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), ejection fraction (EF) and LV mass (LVM) were calculated. Paired sample t-tests were used to compare within group differences, and agreement, using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) [95% confidence interval] and Bland-Altman plots. Interobserver variability was assessed by an external observer analysing a subset of 15 scans, blinded to previous results. Results Fifty patients (mean age 67 ± 10 years, 40% female) were studied. Baseline characteristics are presented in table 1. The median interval between CMR exams was 2 days [Q1-Q3, 1–3]. Baseline heart rate and systolic blood pressure were similar between studies (p=0.502 and p=0.772 respectively). There were no significant differences in EDV (151.2±31.6ml vs. 154.7±33.4ml, p=0.193), ESV (60.4±22.3ml vs. 62.8±23.2ml, p=0.083), EF (60.7±8.9% vs. 60.1±8.1%, p=0.304) or LVM (97.7±28.4g vs. 95.9±27.9g, p=0.370) between exams. All LV volumetric measurements exhibited good agreement between both real-time scans (EDV: ICC 0.83 [0.71–0.90], ESV: 0.91 [0.84–0.95], EF: 0.87 [0.78–0.92] and LVM: 0.87 [0.79–0.93]) with good interobserver agreement (table 2, figure 1A and B). Conclusions In patients with suspected CAD, real-time cine imaging demonstrates good repeatability for LV volumetric assessment. This accelerated imaging technique shows promise for routine integration within clinical practice, improving the tolerability and efficiency of CMR, whilst providing an accurate serial measure of cardiac function. Reference El Shibly M, Parke K, England R, Budgeon CA, Grafton-Clarke C, Xue H, et al. Comparison of standard breath-hold ssfp cardiac MRI with free-breathing real-time cine imaging among patients with known or suspected cardiac disease. Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. 2024;26.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».