MDCT Determination of Volume and Function of the Left Ventricle: Are Short-Axis Image Reformations Necessary?

• Published in: American journal of roentgenology (1976) Vol. 186; no. 6_Supplement_2; pp. S371 - S378
• Main Authors: Juergens, Kai U, Seifarth, Harald, Maintz, David, Grude, Matthias, Ozgun, Murat, Wichter, Thomas, Heindel, Walter, Fischbach, Roman
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Am Roentgen Ray Soc 01.06.2006
• Subjects: Cardiomyopathy, Dilated - diagnostic imaging; Cardiomyopathy, Dilated - physiopathology; Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging; Coronary Artery Disease - physiopathology; Feasibility Studies; Female; Heart Ventricles - diagnostic imaging; Heart Ventricles - pathology; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Organ Size; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods; Ventricular Function, Left
• ISSN: 0361-803X; 1546-3141; 1546-3141
• DOI: 10.2214/AJR.04.1764

Determination of left ventricular (LV) volumes and global function parameters from MDCT data sets is usually based on short-axis reformations from primarily reconstructed axial images, which prolong postprocessing time. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of LV volumetry and global LV function assessment from axial images in comparison with short-axis image reformations. This study consisted of 20 patients with either coronary artery disease or dilated cardiomyopathy. We evaluated MDCT results using cine MRI as the reference technique. LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and end-systolic volume (LVESV) were significantly overestimated by the axial MDCT approach in comparison with volume measurements from short-axis CT image reformations. The mean LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was not significantly different (41.2% vs 42.7%). Short-axis and axial MDCT determination of LVEF revealed a systematic underestimation by a mean +/- SD of -2.1% +/- 3.6% versus -3.6% +/- 8.2%, respectively, when compared with LVEF values based on cine MRI. The interobserver variability for volume and function measurements from axial images (LVEDV = 8.5%, LVESV = 10.8%, LVEF = 9.6%) was slightly higher than those measurements from short-axis reformations (LVEDV = 7.2%, LVESV = 9.5%, LVEF = 8.7%). The mean total evaluation time was significantly shorter using axial images (14.1 +/- 3.9 min) compared with short-axis reformations (16.9 +/- 5.2 min) (p < 0.05). Determination of LV volumes and assessment of global LV function from axial MDCT image reformations is feasible and time efficient. This approach might be a clinically useful alternative to established short-axis-based measurements in patients with normal or near-normal LV function. A progressive underestimation of LVEF with increasing LV volumes may limit the clinical applicability of the axial approach in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy.