Comparison of DeepStrain and feature tracking for cardiac MRI strain analysis Articles uri icon

authors

  • MORALES, MANUEL A.
  • CIRILLO, JULIA
  • NAKATA, KEI
  • KUCUKSEYMEN, SELCUK
  • NGO, LONG H.
  • IZQUIERDO GARCÍA, DAVID
  • CATANA, CIPRIAN
  • NEZAFAT, REZA

publication date

  • May 2023

start page

  • 1507

end page

  • 1515

issue

  • 5

volume

  • 57

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 1053-1807

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1522-2586

abstract

  • Background: Myocardial feature tracking (FT) provides a comprehensive analysis of myocardial deformation from cine balanced steady-state free-precession images (bSSFP). However, FT remains time-consuming, precluding its clinical adoption.

    Purpose: To compare left-ventricular global radial strain (GRS) and global circumferential strain (GCS) values measured using automated DeepStrain analysis of short-axis cine images to those calculated using manual commercially available FT analysis.

    Study Type: Retrospective, single-center.

    Population: A total of 30 healthy subjects and 120 patients with cardiac disease for DeepStrain development. For evaluation, 47 healthy subjects (36 male, 53±5 years) and 533 patients who had undergone a clinical cardiac MRI (373 male, 59±14 years).

    Field Strength/Sequence: bSSFP sequence at 1.5 T (Phillips) and 3 T (Siemens).

    Assessment: Automated DeepStrain measurements of GRS and GCS were compared to commercially available FT (Circle, cvi42) measures obtained by readers with 1 year and 3 years of experience. Comparisons were performed overall and stratified by scanner manufacturer.

    Statistical Tests: Paired t-test, linear regression slope, Pearson correlation coefficient (r).

    Results: Overall, FT and DeepStrain measurements of GCS were not significantly different (P = 0.207), but measures of GRS were significantly different. Measurements of GRS from Philips (slope = 1.06 [1.03 1.08], r = 0.85) and Siemens (slope = 1.04 [0.99 1.09], r = 0.83) data showed a very strong correlation and agreement between techniques. Measurements of GCS from Philips (slope = 0.98 [0.98 1.01], r = 0.91) and Siemens (slope = 1.0 [0.96 1.03], r = 0.88) data similarly showed a very strong correlation.

    The average analysis time per subject was 4.1 ± 1.2 minutes for FT and 34.7 ± 3.3 seconds for DeepStrain, representing a 7-fold reduction in analysis time.

    Data Conclusion: This study demonstrated high correlation of myocardial GCS and GRS measurements between freely available fully automated DeepStrain and commercially available manual FT software, with substantial time-saving in the analysis.

    Evidence Level: 3

    Technical Efficacy: Stage 3

subjects

  • Biology and Biomedicine

keywords

  • myocardial strain; feature tracking; deep learning; automated