oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Estimation of ejection fraction and stroke volume using single- and biplane magnetic resonance imaging of the left cardiac ventricle
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8351-3367
Örebro University, School of Health and Medical Sciences. Department of Clinical Physiology, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
Department of Radiology, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8982-4572
Department of Radiology, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
2008 (English)In: Acta Radiologica, ISSN 0284-1851, E-ISSN 1600-0455, Vol. 49, no 9, p. 1016-1023Article in journal (Other academic) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: In cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), left ventricular stroke volume (SV) and ejection fractions (EF) are occasionally calculated using single-plane and biplane ellipsoid models. In previous studies, the calculated SV and EF using single- and biplane ellipsoid models have been compared to reference values calculated from short-axis (SA) images. In these studies, however, it has been emphasized that through-plane motion of the basal SA images represents an important source of error, which may result in incorrect reference values.

Purpose: To compare the calculated SV and EF using single-plane and biplane ellipsoid models with SV and EF calculated from SA images in which compensation was made for through-plane motion.

Material and Methods: A group of 20 patients who underwent MRI examination were included in the study. SV and EF were calculated using the stack of SA images (which had been compensated for through-plane motion) and compared to the SV and EF calculated according to the single- and biplane ellipsoid models.

Results: The mean difference between the single-plane model and the reference was -0.3±6.5 for EF and 7.2±17.1 ml for SV. Corresponding comparison between the biplane method and the reference resulted in a mean difference of 0.3±6.1 for EF and 11.8±14.9 ml for SV.

Conclusion: The results from this study show that left ventricular EF can be adequately estimated using the single- and biplane ellipsoid models, while SV tends to be overestimated using both geometrical models

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
London: Taylor & Francis , 2008. Vol. 49, no 9, p. 1016-1023
Keywords [en]
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Child, Female, Heart Ventricles, heart anatomy, heart histology, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging/*methods, Male, Middle Aged, Models; Cardiovascular, Stroke Volume
National Category
Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems
Research subject
Cardiology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-3408DOI: 10.1080/02841850802415544ISI: 000260053900009PubMedID: 18841506Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-54349083303OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-3408DiVA, id: diva2:137705
Available from: 2008-12-04 Created: 2008-12-04 Last updated: 2019-03-26Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopusPDF

Authority records BETA

Thunberg, PerEmilsson, Kent

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Thunberg, PerEmilsson, KentRask, Peter
By organisation
School of Health and Medical Sciences
In the same journal
Acta Radiologica
Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 422 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf