European journal of radiology · 2022
Myocardial extracellular volume quantification by cardiac CT in pulmonary hypertension: Comparison with cardiac MRI.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hayashi Hidetaka, Oda Seitaro, Emoto Takafumi, Kidoh Masafumi, Nagayama Yasunori, Nakaura Takeshi, Sakabe Daisuke, Tokuyasu Shinichi, Hirakawa Kyoko, Takashio Seiji, Yamamoto Eiichiro, Tsujita Kenichi, Hirai Toshinori
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Myocardial extracellular volume (ECV) measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been suggested as a marker of disease severity in pulmonary hypertension (PH). However, consistency between ECVs quantified by computed tomography (CT) and MRI has not been sufficiently investigated in (PH). We investigated the utility of CT-ECV in PH, using MRI-ECV as a reference standard.
METHOD: We evaluated 20 patients with known or suspected PH who underwent dual-energy CT, cardiac MRI, and right heart catheterization. We used Pearson correlation analysis to investigate correlations between CT-ECV and MRI-ECV. We also assessed correlations between ECV and mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP).
RESULTS: CT-ECV showed a very strong correlation with MRI-ECV at the anterior (r = 0.83) and posterior right ventricular insertion points (RVIPs) (r = 0.84). CT-ECV and MRI-ECV were strongly correlated in the septum and left ventricular free wall (r = 0.79-0.73) but weakly correlated in the right ventricular free wall (r = 0.26). CT-ECV showed a strong correlation with mPAP in the anterior RVIP (r = 0.64) and a moderate correlation in the posterior RVIP and septum (r = 0.50-0.42). Compared with CT-ECV, MRI-ECV had a higher correlation with mPAP; however, the difference was not significant (anterior RVIP, r = 0.72 [MRI-ECV] vs. 0.64 [CT-ECV], p = 0.663; posterior RVIP, r = 0.67 vs. 0.50, p = 0.446).
CONCLUSION: Dual-energy CT can quantify myocardial ECV and yield results comparable to those obtained using cardiac MRI. CT-ECV in the anterior RVIP could be a noninvasive surrogate marker of disease severity in PH.
METHOD: We evaluated 20 patients with known or suspected PH who underwent dual-energy CT, cardiac MRI, and right heart catheterization. We used Pearson correlation analysis to investigate correlations between CT-ECV and MRI-ECV. We also assessed correlations between ECV and mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP).
RESULTS: CT-ECV showed a very strong correlation with MRI-ECV at the anterior (r = 0.83) and posterior right ventricular insertion points (RVIPs) (r = 0.84). CT-ECV and MRI-ECV were strongly correlated in the septum and left ventricular free wall (r = 0.79-0.73) but weakly correlated in the right ventricular free wall (r = 0.26). CT-ECV showed a strong correlation with mPAP in the anterior RVIP (r = 0.64) and a moderate correlation in the posterior RVIP and septum (r = 0.50-0.42). Compared with CT-ECV, MRI-ECV had a higher correlation with mPAP; however, the difference was not significant (anterior RVIP, r = 0.72 [MRI-ECV] vs. 0.64 [CT-ECV], p = 0.663; posterior RVIP, r = 0.67 vs. 0.50, p = 0.446).
CONCLUSION: Dual-energy CT can quantify myocardial ECV and yield results comparable to those obtained using cardiac MRI. CT-ECV in the anterior RVIP could be a noninvasive surrogate marker of disease severity in PH.