Volume 48, Issue 2 pp. 404-414

Original Research

Improved segmental myocardial strain reproducibility using deformable registration algorithms compared with feature tracking cardiac MRI and speckle tracking echocardiography

Jie Wang BMSci,

Jie Wang BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

The first two authors contributed equally to this work.

Search for more papers by this author

Weihao Li BMSci,

Weihao Li BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

The first two authors contributed equally to this work.

Search for more papers by this author

Jiayu Sun MD,

Jiayu Sun MD

Department of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Hong Liu BMSci,

Hong Liu BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Yu Kang BMSci,

Yu Kang BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Dan Yang BMSci,

Dan Yang BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Liuyu Yu,

Liuyu Yu

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Andreas Greiser PhD,

Andreas Greiser PhD

Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany

Search for more papers by this author

Xiaoyue Zhou PhD,

Xiaoyue Zhou PhD

Siemens Healthcare, Shanghai, China

Search for more papers by this author

Yuchi Han MD, MMSc,

Yuchi Han MD, MMSc

Department of Medicine (Cardiovascular Division), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Yucheng Chen MD,

Corresponding Author

Yucheng Chen MD

[email protected]

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Address reprint requests to: Y.C., Department of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610041, China. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author

Jie Wang BMSci,

Jie Wang BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

The first two authors contributed equally to this work.

Search for more papers by this author

Weihao Li BMSci,

Weihao Li BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

The first two authors contributed equally to this work.

Search for more papers by this author

Jiayu Sun MD,

Jiayu Sun MD

Department of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Hong Liu BMSci,

Hong Liu BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Yu Kang BMSci,

Yu Kang BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Dan Yang BMSci,

Dan Yang BMSci

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Liuyu Yu,

Liuyu Yu

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author

Andreas Greiser PhD,

Andreas Greiser PhD

Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany

Search for more papers by this author

Xiaoyue Zhou PhD,

Xiaoyue Zhou PhD

Siemens Healthcare, Shanghai, China

Search for more papers by this author

Yuchi Han MD, MMSc,

Yuchi Han MD, MMSc

Department of Medicine (Cardiovascular Division), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Yucheng Chen MD,

Corresponding Author

Yucheng Chen MD

[email protected]

Department of Cadiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

First published: 28 December 2017

https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25937

Citations: 19

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

Background

Segmental myocardial strain using feature tracking (FT) cardiac MRI is not acceptable due to poor reproducibility.

Purpose

To assess the reproducibility of left ventricle (LV) segmental myocardial strain measured by deformation registration algorithm (DRA).

Study Type

Prospective clinical trial.

Subjects

Sixteen healthy volunteers and 28 hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) patients.

Field Strength/Sequence

Retrospective ECG gating cardiac MRI imaging was performed at 3.0T with a steady-state free precession (SSFP) sequence.

Assessment

LV global and segmental myocardial strains were analyzed by DRA, FT, and speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) by two experienced observers and the reproducibility of global and segmental strains were compared.

Statistical Tests

Reproducibility was tested by coefficient of variation (COV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Receiver operator curves as well as comparison of areas under the curve (AUC) were analyzed.

Results

DRA showed the best observer agreement on segmental strain evaluated by ICC, LS (longitudinal strain): intraobserver variability range (0.98,1.00), interobserver variability range (0.83,0.92), CS (circumferential strain): intraobserver variability range (0.90,0.99), interobserver variability range (0.80,0.97), RS (radial strain): intraobserver variability range (0.84,0.99), interobserver variability range (0.85,0.99). Segmental LS, CS, and RS agreements evaluated by COV for FT and STE were poor. LV global myocardial strain of HCM was significantly lower than controls for all applied techniques, but global CS by DRA had better accuracy compared to FT or STE for distinguishing HCM from healthy subjects: AUC 0.880 (DRA) vs. 0.577 (FT) or 0.736 (STE), P < 0.05.

Data Conclusions

DRA is a reliable and robust analysis tool for segmental myocardial strain. Global CS by DRA allows discrimination between HCM and normal controls with better accuracy compared with FT and STE.

Level of Evidence: 1

Technical Efficacy: Stage 2

J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2018;48:404–414.

Conflict of Interest

A.G. and X.-Y.Z. are employees of Siemens. The authors declare that they have no competing interests regarding this study.

References

1 Kraigherkrainer E, Shah AM, Gupta DK, et al. Impaired systolic function by strain imaging in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 63: 447–456.
10.1016/j.jacc.2013.09.052
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
2 Buckert D, Cieslik M, Tibi R, et al. Longitudinal strain assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance correlates to hemodynamic findings in patients with severe aortic stenosis and predicts positive remodeling after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Clin Res Cardiol 2017; 1–10.
Web of Science® Google Scholar
3 Kowalski M, Kukulski T, Jamal F, et al. Can natural strain and strain rate quantify regional myocardial deformation? A study in healthy subjects. Ultrasound Med Biol 2001; 27: 1087–1097.
10.1016/S0301-5629(01)00388-X
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4 Jeung MY, Germain P, Croisille P, El GS, Roy C, Gangi A. Myocardial tagging with MR imaging: overview of normal and pathologic findings. Radiographics 2012; 32: 1381.
10.1148/rg.325115098
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5 Jiang K, Yu X. Quantification of regional myocardial wall motion by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2014; 4: 345–357.
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6 Hor KN, Gottliebson WM, Carson C, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance feature tracking for strain calculation with harmonic phase imaging analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2010; 3: 144–151.
10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.11.006
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7 Augustine D, Lewandowski AJ, Lazdam M, et al. Global and regional left ventricular myocardial deformation measures by magnetic resonance feature tracking in healthy volunteers: comparison with tagging and relevance of gender. J Cardiovasc Magn R 2013; 15: 8.
10.1186/1532-429X-15-8
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8 Collins JD. Global and regional functional assessment of ischemic heart disease with cardiac MR imaging. Radiol Clin N Am 2015; 53: 369.
10.1016/j.rcl.2014.11.001
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9 Lamacie MM, Thavendiranathan P, Hanneman K, et al. Quantification of global myocardial function by cine MRI deformable registration-based analysis: Comparison with MR feature tracking and speckle-tracking echocardiography. Eur Radiol 2017; 27: 1404–1415.
10.1007/s00330-016-4514-0
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
10 Lin K, Collins JD, Chowdhary V, Markl M, Carr JC. Heart deformation analysis for automated quantification of cardiac function and regional myocardial motion patterns: A proof of concept study in patients with cardiomyopathy and healthy subjects. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85: 1811–1817.
10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.08.005
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11 Gersh BJ, Maron BJ, Bonow RO, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011; 142: e153–e203.
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.10.020
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12 Delong ER, Delong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837–845.
10.2307/2531595
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13 Hor KN, Rolf B, Gianni P, et al. Magnetic resonance derived myocardial strain assessment using feature tracking. J Visual Exper 2011; 28: 538–544.
Google Scholar
14 Guetter C, Xue H, Chefd'Hotel C, Guehring J. Efficient symmetric and inverse-consistent deformable registration through interleaved optimization. In: IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano To Macro, 2011; 590–593.
Google Scholar
15 Phatak NS, Maas SA, Veress AI, Pack NA, Bella EVRD, Weiss JA. Strain measurement in the left ventricle during systole with deformable image registration. Med Image Anal 2009; 13: 354–361.
10.1016/j.media.2008.07.004
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16 Boldea V, Sharp GC, Jiang SB, Sarrut D. 4D-CT lung motion estimation with deformable registration: quantification of motion nonlinearity and hysteresis. Med Phys 2008; 35: 1008–1018.
10.1118/1.2839103
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17 Yu W, Yan P, Sinusas AJ, Thiele K, Duncan JS. Towards pointwise motion tracking in echocardiographic image sequences—comparing the reliability of different features for speckle tracking. Med Image Anal 2006; 10: 495–508.
10.1016/j.media.2005.12.003
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18 Hong L, Dan Y, Ke W, et al. Distribution pattern of left-ventricular myocardial strain analyzed by a cine MRI based deformation registration algorithm in healthy Chinese volunteers. Sci Rep UK 2017; 7: 45314.
10.1038/srep45314
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19 Reant P, Mirabel M, Lloyd G, et al. Global longitudinal strain is associated with heart failure outcomes in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Heart 2016; 102: 741.
10.1136/heartjnl-2015-308576
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20 Amaki M, Savino J, Ain DL, et al. Diagnostic concordance of echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance-based tissue tracking for differentiating constrictive pericarditis from restrictive cardiomyopathy. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2014; 7: 819–827.
10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.114.002103
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21 Padiyath A, Gribben P, Abraham JR, et al. Echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance-based feature tracking in the assessment of myocardial mechanics in tetralogy of Fallot: an intermodality comparison. Echocardiography 2013; 30: 203–210.
10.1111/echo.12016
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22 Orwat S, Kempny A, Diller GP, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking: a novel method to assess myocardial strain. Comparison with echocardiographic speckle tracking in healthy volunteers and in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. Kardiol Pol 2014; 72: 363–371.
10.5603/KP.a2013.0319
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23 Schmidt R, Orwat S, Kempny A, et al. Value of speckle-tracking echocardiography and MRI-based feature tracking analysis in adult patients after Fontan-type palliation. Congenit Heart Dis 2014; 9: 397.
10.1111/chd.12156
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24 Soslow JH, Xu M, Slaughter JC, et al. Evaluation of echocardiographic measures of left ventricular function in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: assessment of reproducibility and comparison to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2016; 29: 983–991.
10.1016/j.echo.2016.07.001
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
25 Goto Y, Ishida M, Takase S, et al. Comparison of displacement encoding with stimulated echoes to magnetic resonance feature tracking for the assessment of myocardial strain in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2017; 119: 1542–1547.
10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.02.029
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
26 Amundsen BH, Crosby J, Steen PA, Torp H, Slørdahl SA, Støylen A. Regional myocardial long-axis strain and strain rate measured by different tissue Doppler and speckle tracking echocardiography methods: a comparison with tagged magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009; 10: 229–237.
10.1093/ejechocard/jen201
Web of Science® Google Scholar
27 Onishi T, Saha SK, Delgado-Montero A, et al. Global longitudinal strain and global circumferential strain by speckle-tracking echocardiography and feature-tracking cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015; 28: 587–596.
10.1016/j.echo.2014.11.018
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
28 Barbier P, Mirea O, Cefalù C, Maltagliati A, Savioli G, Guglielmo M. Reliability and feasibility of longitudinal AFI global and segmental strain compared with 2D left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction: intra- and inter-operator, test-retest, and inter-cycle reproducibility. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2015; 16: 642–652.
10.1093/ehjci/jeu274
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
29 Thorstensen A, Dalen H, Amundsen BH, Aase SA, Stoylen A. Reproducibility in echocardiographic assessment of the left ventricular global and regional function, the HUNT study. Eur J Echocardiogr 2010; 11: 149–156.
10.1093/ejechocard/jep188
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
30 Koopman LP, Slorach C, Hui W, et al. Comparison between different speckle tracking and color tissue Doppler techniques to measure global and regional myocardial deformation in children. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2010; 23: 919–928.
10.1016/j.echo.2010.06.014
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
31 Mirea O, Pagourelias ED, Duchenne J, et al. Variability and reproducibility of segmental longitudinal strain measurement. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2017 [Epub ahead of print].
Web of Science® Google Scholar
32 Morton G, Schuster A, Jogiya R, Kutty S, Beerbaum P, Nagel E. Inter-study reproducibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2012; 14: 43.
10.1186/1532-429X-14-43
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
33 Schuster A, Morton G, Hussain ST, et al. The intra-observer reproducibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial feature tracking strain assessment is independent of field strength. Eur J Radiol 2013; 82: 296–301.
10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.11.012
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
34 Wu L, Germans T, Güçlü A, Heymans MW, Allaart CP, van Rossum AC. Feature tracking compared with tissue tagging measurements of segmental strain by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2014; 16: 10.
10.1186/1532-429X-16-10
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
35 Hor KN, Gottliebson WM, Carson C, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance feature tracking for strain calculation with harmonic phase imaging analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2010; 3: 144–151.
10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.11.006
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
36 Moody WE, Taylor RJ, Edwards NC, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance feature tracking for systolic and diastolic strain and strain rate calculation with spatial modulation of magnetization imaging analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015; 41: 1000–1012.
10.1002/jmri.24623
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
37 Harrild DM, Han Y, Geva T, Zhou J, Marcus E, Powell AJ. Comparison of cardiac MRI tissue tracking and myocardial tagging for assessment of regional ventricular strain. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2012; 28: 2009–2018.
10.1007/s10554-012-0035-3
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
38 McLeod CJ, Bos JM, Theis JL, et al. Histologic characterization of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with and without myofilament mutations. Am Heart J 2009; 158: 799–805.
10.1016/j.ahj.2009.09.006
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
39 Popovic ZB, Kwon DH, Mishra M, et al. Association between regional ventricular function and myocardial fibrosis in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy assessed by speckle tracking echocardiography and delayed hyperenhancement magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2008; 21: 1299–1305.
10.1016/j.echo.2008.09.011
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
40 Garceau P, Carasso S, Woo A, Overgaard C, Schwartz L, Rakowski H. Evaluation of left ventricular relaxation and filling pressures in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: comparison between invasive hemodynamics and two-dimensional speckle tracking. Echocardiography 2012; 29: 934–942.
10.1111/j.1540-8175.2012.01708.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume48, Issue2

August 2018

Pages 404-414

Improved segmental myocardial strain reproducibility using deformable registration algorithms compared with feature tracking cardiac MRI and speckle tracking echocardiography

Abstract

Background

Purpose

Study Type

Subjects

Field Strength/Sequence

Assessment

Statistical Tests

Results

Data Conclusions

Conflict of Interest

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Improved segmental myocardial strain reproducibility using deformable registration algorithms compared with feature tracking cardiac MRI and speckle tracking echocardiography

Abstract

Background

Purpose

Study Type

Subjects

Field Strength/Sequence

Assessment

Statistical Tests

Results

Data Conclusions

Conflict of Interest

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information