nach oben

Erschienen in:

02.07.2020 | Computed Tomography

A fully automated software platform for structural mitral valve analysis

verfasst von: Robert Steinbach, U. Joseph Schoepf, L. Parkwood Griffith, Marly van Assen, Matthias Renker, Pooyan Sahbaee, Chris Schwemmer, Andreas M. Fischer, Akos Varga-Szemes, Simon S. Martin, Richard R. Bayer II

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 12/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate a novel fully automated mitral valve analysis software platform for cardiac computer tomography angiography (CCTA)-based structural heart therapy procedure planning.

Methods

The study included 52 patients (25 women; mean age, 66.9 ± 12.4 years) who had undergone CCTA prior to transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) or surgical mitral valve intervention (replacement or repair). Therapeutically relevant mitral valve annulus parameters (projected area, circumference, trigone-to-trigone (T-T) distance, anterior-posterior (AP) diameter, and anterolateral-posteromedial (AL-PM) diameter) were measured. Results of the fully automated mitral valve analysis software platform with and without manual adjustments were compared with the reference standard of a user-driven measurement program (3mensio, Pie Medical Imaging). Measurements were compared between the fully automated software, both with and without manual adjustment, and the user-driven program using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). A secondary analysis included the time to obtain all measurements.

Results

Fully automated measurements showed a good to excellent agreement (circumference, ICC = 0.70; projected area, ICC = 0.81; T-T distance, ICC = 0.64; AP, ICC = 0.62; and AL-PM diameter, ICC = 0.78) compared with the user-driven analysis. There was an excellent agreement between fully automated measurement with manual adjustments and user-driven analysis regarding circumference (ICC = 0.91), projected area (ICC = 0.93), T-T distance (ICC = 0.80), AP (ICC = 0.78), and AL-PM diameter (ICC = 0.79). The time required for mitral valve analysis was significantly lower using the fully automated software with manual adjustments compared with the standard assessment (134.4 ± 36.4 s vs. 304.3 ± 77.7 s) (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

The fully automated mitral valve analysis software, when combined with manual adjustments, demonstrated a strong correlation compared with the user-driven software while reducing the total time required for measurement.

Key Points

• The novel software platform allows for a fully automated analysis of mitral valve structures.

• An excellent agreement was found between the fully automated measurement with manual adjustments and the user-driven analysis.

• The software showed quicker measurement time compared with the standard analysis of the mitral valve.

Moore M, Chen J, Mallow PJ, Rizzo JA (2016) The direct health-care burden of valvular heart disease: evidence from US national survey data. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res 8:613–627. https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S112691CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Feinberg MS, Schwammenthal E, Shlizerman L et al (2000) Prognostic significance of mild mitral regurgitation by color Doppler echocardiography in acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 86(9):9031313r. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(00)01119-xCrossRef

Grigioni F, Enriquez-Sarano M, Zehr KJ, Bailey KR, Tajik AJ (2001) Ischemic mitral regurgitation: long-term outcome and prognostic implications with quantitative Doppler assessment. Circulation 103(13):175959on. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.103.13.1759CrossRef

Koelling TM, Aaronson KD, Cody RJ, Bach DS, Armstrong WF (2002) Prognostic significance of mitral regurgitation and tricuspid regurgitation in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Am Heart J 144(3):524–529. https://doi.org/10.1067/mhj.2002.123575CrossRefPubMed

Capoulade R, Piriou N, Serfaty J-M, Le Tourneau T (2017) Multimodality imaging assessment of mitral valve anatomy in planning for mitral valve repair in secondary mitral regurgitation. J Thorac Dis 9(Suppl 7):S640–S660. https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2017.06.99CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Choo WS, Steeds RP et al (2011) Cardiac imaging in valvular heart disease. Br J Radiol 84 Spec No 3(Spec Iss 3):S245–S257. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/54030257

Weir-McCall JR, Blanke P, Naoum C, Delgado V, Bax JJ, Leipsic J (2018) Mitral valve imaging with CT: relationship with transcatheter mitral valve interventions. Radiology 288(3):638–655. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018172758CrossRefPubMed

Alkadhi H, Desbiolles L, Stolzmann P et al (2009) Mitral annular shape, size, and motion in normals and in patients with cardiomyopathy: evaluation with computed tomography. Invest Radiol 44(4):218s. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181994a73CrossRef

Blanke P, Dvir D, Cheung A et al (2015) Mitral annular evaluation with CT in the context of transcatheter mitral valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 8(5):612–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2014.07.028

10.

Dal-Bianco JP, Levine RA (2013) Anatomy of the mitral valve apparatus: role of 2D and 3D echocardiography. Cardiol Clin 31(2):151–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccl.2013.03.001CrossRefPubMed

11.

Morris MF, Maleszewski JJ, Suri RM et al (2010) CT and MR imaging of the mitral valve: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics 30(6):1603–1620. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.306105518

12.

Blanke P, Dvir D, Cheung A et al (2014) A simplified D-shaped model of the mitral annulus to facilitate CT-based sizing before transcatheter mitral valve implantation. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 8(6):459–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2014.09.009

13.

Gordic S, Nguyen-Kim TD, Manka R et al (2014) Sizing the mitral annulus in healthy subjects and patients with mitral regurgitation: 2D versus 3D measurements from cardiac CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 30(2):389–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-013-0341-4

14.

Naoum C, Leipsic J, Cheung A et al (2016) Mitral annular dimensions and geometry in patients with functional mitral regurgitation and mitral valve prolapse: implications for transcatheter mitral valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 9(3):269–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.08.022

15.

Lou J, Obuchowski NA, Krishnaswamy A et al (2015) Manual, semiautomated, and fully automated measurement of the aortic annulus for planning of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR/TAVI): analysis of interchangeability. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 9(1):42–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2014.11.003

16.

Blanke P, Spira EM, Ionasec R et al (2014) Semiautomated quantification of aortic annulus dimensions on cardiac CT for TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 7(3):320–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2013.11.005

17.

Flachskampf FA, Chandra S, Gaddipatti A et al (2000) Analysis of shape and motion of the mitral annulus in subjects with and without cardiomyopathy by echocardiographic 3-dimensional reconstruction. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 13(4):277–287. https://doi.org/10.1067/mje.2000.103878

18.

Ho SY (2002) Anatomy of the mitral valve. Heart 88(Suppl 4):iv5–i10. https://doi.org/10.1136/heart.88.suppl_4.iv5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Delgado V, Tops LF, Schuijf JD et al (2009) Assessment of mitral valve anatomy and geometry with multislice computed tomography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2(5):556–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2008.12.025

20.

O'Brien JP, Srichai MB, Hecht EM, Kim DC, Jacobs JE (2007) Anatomy of the heart at multidetector CT: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiographics 27(6):1569–1582. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.276065747CrossRefPubMed

21.

Grbic S, Ionasec R, Vitanovski D et al (2012) Complete valvular heart apparatus model from 4D cardiac CT. Med Image Anal 16(5):1003–1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2012.02.003

22.

Cicchetti DV (1994) Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess 6(4):284–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284CrossRef

23.

Watanabe Y, Morice M-C, Bouvier E et al (2013) Automated 3-dimensional aortic annular assessment by multidetector computed tomography in transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 6(9):955–964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2013.05.008

24.

van Linden A, Kempfert J, Blumenstein J et al (2014) Manual versus automatic detection of aortic annulus plane in a computed tomography scan for transcatheter aortic valve implantation screening. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 46(2):207–212; discussion 212. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezt600CrossRefPubMed

25.

Kim JH, Kim EY, Jin GY, Choi JB (2017) A review of the use of cardiac computed tomography for evaluating the mitral valve before and after mitral valve repair. Korean J Radiol 18(5):773–785. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2017.18.5.773CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Guez D, Boroumand G, Ruggiero NJ, Mehrotra P, Halpern EJ (2017) Automated and manual measurements of the aortic annulus with ECG-gated cardiac CT angiography prior to transcatheter aortic valve replacement: comparison with 3D-transesophageal echocardiography. Acad Radiol 24(5):587–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2016.12.008CrossRefPubMed

Titel: A fully automated software platform for structural mitral valve analysis
verfasst von: Robert Steinbach
U. Joseph Schoepf
L. Parkwood Griffith
Marly van Assen
Matthias Renker
Pooyan Sahbaee
Chris Schwemmer
Andreas M. Fischer
Akos Varga-Szemes
Simon S. Martin
Richard R. Bayer II
Publikationsdatum: 02.07.2020
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Radiology / Ausgabe 12/2020
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06983-7

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

A fully automated software platform for structural mitral valve analysis