Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jun;103(6):441-50.
doi: 10.1007/s00392-014-0669-3. Epub 2014 Jan 23.

Classification of Diastolic Function With Phase-Contrast Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Validation With Echocardiography and Age-Related Reference Values

Affiliations

Classification of Diastolic Function With Phase-Contrast Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Validation With Echocardiography and Age-Related Reference Values

Sebastian J Buss et al. Clin Res Cardiol. .

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate whether cardiac magnetic resonance phase-contrast imaging (PC-CMR) can determine left ventricular (LV) diastolic function in comparison to echocardiography (EC).

Background: Non-invasive evaluation of diastolic function is important for the diagnostic classification and risk stratification of patients with cardiomyopathies. With EC, diastolic function is classified based on the mitral blood flow, LV myocardial tissue Doppler velocities and pulmonary venous flow. PC-CMR has the potential to measure these parameters and may be an important tool to assess diastolic function in clinical routine.

Methods: In 36 patients with various cardiovascular diseases and 6 healthy volunteers, we performed single-slice short-axis PC-CMR at the level of the mitral leaflet tip and the inflow of the pulmonary veins to generate EC-comparable mitral E and A waves, septal and lateral e' and a' tissue velocities, and E/A and E/e' ratios. EC was performed after PC-CMR in all patients and six volunteers. Patients were classified into three groups of DD for both techniques. In addition, we evaluated 120 healthy volunteers as controls (3 age groups: 1 = 20-35 years; 2 = 36-50 years; 3 ≥ 51 years) for reference values.

Results: PC-CMR correlation with EC regarding the relation of mitral E and A velocities was good (r = 0.83, p < 0.001). The correlation for the mean septal and lateral E/e' ratio was high with r = 0.90 (p < 0.001). 40/42 subjects (95 %) were categorized correctly. The mean scan time for PC-CMR was 189 ± 16 s and mean analysis time was 348 ± 95 s. EC image acquisition time was slightly higher (201 ± 37 s, p = n.s.), whereas EC image analysis time was significantly lower (149 ± 23 s, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The classification of DD with PC-CMR is feasible and shows good agreement with the widely accepted EC classification of DD. We present a practical approach for the clinically important assessment of DD with PC-CMR, circumventing sophisticated and time-consuming CMR sequences and specially designed software analysis tools.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 7 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2004 Jul;17 (7):788-802 - PubMed
    1. JAMA. 2011 Aug 24;306(8):856-63 - PubMed
    1. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Jun;28(5):1003-10 - PubMed
    1. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Sep 27;58(14 ):1401-13 - PubMed
    1. Clin Res Cardiol. 2011 Aug;100(8):649-59 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback