Compressed sensing cine imaging with higher temporal resolution for analysis of left atrial strain and strain rate by cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking

Normal Values for Atrial Deformation Measured by Feature-Tracking Cardiac MRI: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

A consensus on normal atrial deformation measurements by feature-tracking cardiac MRI remained absent.

PURPOSE

Provide reference ranges for atrial strain parameters in normal subjects, evaluating the influence of field strength and analysis software on the measurements.

STUDY TYPE

Meta-analysis.

POPULATION

2708 subjects from 42 studies undergoing cardiac MRI.

ASSESSMENT

A systematic search was conducted from database (PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and EMBASE) inception through August 2023. The random-effects model was used to pool the means of biatrial strain parameters. Heterogeneity and clinical variable effects were assessed. Strain measurements among different field strengths and analysis software were compared.

STATISTICAL TESTS

The inverse-variance method, Cochrane Q statistic, and I2 value, meta-regression analysis, and ANOVA were used; P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The pooled means of left atrial (LA) total strain (εs), passive strain (εe), and active strain (εa) were 37.46%, 22.73%, and 16.24%, respectively, and the pooled means of LA total strain rate (SRs), passive strain rate (SRe), and active strain rate (SRa) were 1.66, -1.95, and -1.83, indicating significant heterogeneity. The pooled means of right atrial (RA) εs, εe, and εa were 44.87%, 26.05%, and 18.83%. RA SRs, SRe, and SRa were 1.66, -1.95, and -1.83, respectively. The meta-regression identified age as significantly associated with LA εs, εe and SRe, field strength was associated with LA SRa (all P < 0.05). ANOVA revealed differences in LA εa and SRa among different analysis software and in LA εs and all LA strain rates (all P < 0.05) among field strengths. No significant differences were identified in RA strain across analysis software (RA strain: P = 0.145-0.749; RA strain rates: P = 0.073-0.744) and field strengths (RA strain: P = 0.641-0.794; RA strain rates: P = 0.204-0.458).

DATA CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the pooled reference values of biatrial strain. Age, analysis software, and field strength were attributed to differences in LA strain, whereas RA strain showed consistency across different field strengths and analysis software. Limited study subjects may account for the absence of influence on RA strain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1

TECHNICAL EFFICACY

Stage 5.

The effects of flip angle and gadolinium contrast agent on single breath-hold compressed sensing cardiac magnetic resonance cine for biventricular global strain assessment

Background

Due to its potential to significantly reduce scanning time while delivering accurate results for cardiac volume function, compressed sensing (CS) has gained traction in cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) cine. However, further investigation is necessary to explore its feasibility and impact on myocardial strain results.

Materials and methods

A total of 102 participants [75 men, 46.5 ± 17.1 (SD) years] were included in this study. Each patient underwent four consecutive cine sequences with the same slice localization, including the reference multi-breath-hold balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFPref) cine, the CS cine with the same flip angle as bSSFPref before (CS45) and after (eCS45) contrast enhancement, and the CS cine (eCS70) with a 70-degree flip angle after contrast enhancement. Biventricular strain parameters were derived from cine images. Two-tailed paired t-tests were used for data analysis.

Results

Global radial strain (GRS), global circumferential strain (GCS), and global longitudinal strain (GLS) were observed to be significantly lower in comparison to those obtained from bSSFPref sequences for both the right and left ventricles (all p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed on biventricular GRS-LAX (long-axis) and GLS values derived from enhanced and unenhanced CS cine sequences with the same flip angle, but remarkable reductions were noted in GRS-SAX (short-axis) and GCS values (p < 0.001). After contrast injection, a larger flip angle caused a significant elevation in left ventricular strain results (p < 0.001) but did not affect the right ventricle. The increase in flip angle appeared to compensate for contrast agent affection on left ventricular GRS-SAX, GCS values, and right ventricular GRS-LAX, GLS values.

Conclusion

Despite incorporating gadolinium contrast agents and applying larger flip angles, single breath-hold CS cine sequences consistently yielded diminished strain values for both ventricles when compared with conventional cine sequences. Prior to employing this single breath-hold CS cine sequence to refine the clinical CMR examination procedure, it is crucial to consider its impact on myocardial strain results.