Feedback-assisted three-dimensional reconstruction of the left ventricle with MRI.
Feedback-assisted three-dimensional reconstruction of the left ventricle with MRI.
复制标题
MRI 反馈辅助左心室三维重建。
DOI：
10.1002/jmri.10290
复制
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Jerosch-Herold,Michael
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Swingen,CoryM;Seethamraju,RaviTeja;Jerosch-Herold,Michael
PurposeTo开发和测试一种新的技术，快速，准确的三维（3D）重建左心室（LV）和计算其体积参数，从多个方向和交互式feedbacks.Materials和MethodsThe心室表面的图像与一些用户放置的磁共振（MR）图像中的引导点使用二元平滑样条拟合。重建三维模型，计算左室舒张末期（艾德）和收缩末期（ES）的容积。该技术使用体模进行了验证，并应用于在1.5‐T临床扫描仪上成像的18名患者和4名志愿者（N= 22）的研究。将3D方法的结果与广泛用于心功能分析的标准2D短轴切片求和技术进行了比较。结果使用3D建模方法计算的体模体积与实际体积（分别为190.50 mL ± 3.06 mL和191.0 mL ± 2.5 mL）之间具有良好的一致性。使用我们的3D模型计算的体积与切片求和技术之间具有良好的相关性（艾德体积（EDV）差异，6.36% ± 8.99% [平均值± SD]; ES体积（ESV），0.92% ± 14.75%;每搏输出量（SV），10.54% ± 13.95%;射血分数（EF），4.22% ± 9.16%）。发现3D方法在从不同切片方向的图像计算LV体积和质量时比切片求和技术更准确。使用3D模型与切片总和法的两个单独方向之间的参数变化如下：EDV：2.11% ± 1.52% vs. 10.36% ± 9.33%; ES体积：2.76% ± 1.64% vs. 6.39% ± 3.62%; SV：3.02% ± 4.38% vs. 18.84% ± 15.30%; EF，2.03% ± 2.16% vs. 8.58% ± 6.73%; LV质量：4.77% ± 2.41% vs. 24.59% ± 6.41%。结果显示，三维模型计算的ES容积与切片求和法计算的ES容积的差值（6.90% ± 3.83%）明显小于切片求和法（25.04% ± 6.15%）。可以使用来自各种方向的图像获得结果，从而在图像采集期间提供更大的灵活性，并可能减少分析所需的图像数量。通过提供LV形状和体积的连续更新来提供反馈以辅助分析。此功能允许用户确定LV参数达到预定义的精度，或在参数未发生变化时终止分析。该方法不限于在单个或规定的切片方向上的多层电影成像，并且可以用于快速、准确和交互式的心脏功能分析。J.磁共振成像2003;17：528-537.© 2003 Wiley利斯公司
PurposeTo develop and test a new technique for rapid, accurate three‐dimensional (3D) reconstruction of the left ventricle (LV) and calculation of its volume parameters, with images from multiple orientations and interactive feedback.Materials and MethodsThe ventricular surface was fit to a number of user‐placed guide points in magnetic resonance (MR) images using bivariate smoothing splines. A 3D model was reconstructed and the LV volumes were calculated at both end diastole (ED) and end systole (ES). This technique was validated using a phantom, and applied to studies of 18 patients and four volunteers (N= 22) imaged on a 1.5‐T clinical scanner. The results of the 3D method were compared to the standard 2D short‐axis slice summation technique, which is widely used for the analysis of cardiac function.ResultsThere was excellent agreement between the computed volume of the phantom using the 3D modeling method and the actual volume (190.50 mL ± 3.06 mL, and 191.0 mL ± 2.5 mL, respectively). There was good correlation between the volumes calculated with our 3D model and the slice summation technique (ED volume (EDV) difference, 6.36% ± 8.99% [mean ± SD]; ES volume (ESV), 0.92% ± 14.75%; stroke volume (SV), 10.54% ± 13.95%; ejection fraction (EF), 4.22% ± 9.16%). The 3D method was found to be more accurate than the slice summation technique for calculating LV volumes and mass from images of different slice orientations. Variations in the parameters between the two separate orientations using the 3D model vs. the slice summation method were as follows: EDV: 2.11% ± 1.52% vs. 10.36% ± 9.33%; ES volume: 2.76% ± 1.64% vs. 6.39% ± 3.62%; SV, 3.02% ± 4.38% vs. 18.84% ± 15.30%; EF, 2.03% ± 2.16% vs. 8.58% ± 6.73%; and LV mass: 4.77% ± 2.41% vs. 24.59% ± 6.41%. Differences in the ES volume due to the inclusion or exclusion of the most basal slice were found to be lower with the 3D model (6.90% ± 3.83%) compared to the slice summation method (25.04% ± 6.15%).Conclusion3D models can be used to accurately determine ventricular volume parameters. Results can be obtained using images from a variety of orientations, providing greater flexibility during image acquisition and possibly reducing the number of images needed for analysis. Feedback is provided to assist the analysis by providing a continuous update of the LV shape and volume. This feature allows the user to determine LV parameters to a predefined accuracy or to terminate the analysis when the parameters are not changing. This method is not restricted to multislice cine imaging in a single or prescribed slice orientation, and can be used for quick, accurate, and interactive analysis of cardiac function. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2003;17:528–537. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.