Optimising the imaging plane for right ventricular magnetic resonance volume analysis in adult patients referred for assessment of right ventricular structure and function. Issue 4 (21st April 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lyen, Stephen; Mathias, Helen; McAlindon, Elisa; Trickey, Adam; Rodrigues, Jonathan; Bucciarelli‐Ducci, Chiara; Hamilton, Mark; Manghat, Nathan
• Is Part Of: Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology. Volume 59:Issue 4(2015:Aug.)
• Page Start: 421
• Page End: 430
• Publication Date: 2015-04-21
• Subjects: cardiac imaging techniques -- cardiac volume -- heart ventricles -- magnetic resonance imaging; Radiology, Medical -- Periodicals; Radiology, Medical -- Australasia -- Periodicals; 616.0757
• DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.12303
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1754-9477

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Our aim was to evaluate the reproducibility and accuracy of using short‐axis and axial (transaxial) plane for magnetic resonance imaging analysis in adult patients referred for assessment of right ventricular (RV) structure and function. Methods: Twenty consecutive subjects (10 male, 10 female, mean age 32.2 ± 14.8 years) who were referred for RV assessment and had cardiac magnetic resonance imaging were retrospectively selected. Axial and short‐axis manual contouring was performed using cine steady‐state free precession sequences by three experienced imaging specialists. The reproducibility of end diastolic volumes, end systolic volumes and ejection fraction was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and paired t‐tests. Left ventricular stroke volume (LVSV) and RV stroke volumes (RVSV) were compared with concordance correlation coefficients (CCCs) and t‐tests to determine accuracy. Results: The concordance between the RVSV and LVSV was good using both methods (axial RVSV CCC = 0.93, short‐axis RVSV CCC = 0.86). Paired t ‐test and analysis of variance showed that the LV/RV stroke volume differences were not significant ( p = 0.17). There was slight improvement in interobserver reliability with end systolic volume measurements (axial ICC = 0.92, short‐axis ICC = 0.81) but this failed to reach statistical significance ( p = 0.37). There was excellent intraobserver variability (ICC > 0.9). Conclusion: This study shows that there is no statistically significant difference in reproducibility or accuracy using the short‐axis or axial orientations in RV volume analysis in adult patients being referred for RV assessment.