Cardiac magnetic resonance versus transthoracic echocardiography for the assessment of cardiac volumes and regional function after myocardial infarction: an intrasubject comparison using simultaneous intrasubject recordings.
BACKGROUND
Although echocardiography is commonly used to evaluate cardiac function after MI, CMR may provide more accurate functional assessment but has not been adequately compared with echo. The primary study objective was to compare metrics of left ventricular volumes and global and regional function determined by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and echocardiography (echo) in patients (pts) with recent myocardial infarction (MI).


METHODS
To compare CMR with echo, 47 consecutive patients (pts 70% male; mean age = 66 +/- 11 years) with MI >6 wks previously and scheduled for imaging evaluation were studied by both echo and CMR within 60 min of each other. Readers were blinded to pt information. Pearson's correlation coefficient, paired t-tests, and chi-square tests were used to compare CMR and echo measures. Further comparisons were made between pts and 30 normal controls for CMR and between pts and published normal ranges for echo.


RESULTS
Measures of volume and function correlated moderately well between CMR and echo (r = 0.54 to 0.75, all p < 0.001), but large and systematic differences were noted in absolute measurements. Echo underestimated left ventricular (LV) volumes (by 69 ml for end-diastolic, 35 ml for end-systolic volume, both p < 0.001), stroke volume (by 34 ml, p < 0.001), and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) (by 4 percentage point, p = 0.02). CMR was much more sensitive to detection of segmental wall motion abnormalities (p < 0.001). CMR comparisons with normal controls confirmed an increase in LV volumes, a decrease in LVEF, and preservation of stroke volume after MI.


CONCLUSIONS
This intra subject comparison after MI found large, systematic differences between CMR and echo measures of volumes, LVEF, and wall motion abnormality despite moderate inter-modality correlations, with echo underestimating each metric. CMR also provided superior detection and quantification of segmental function after MI. Serial studies of LV function in individual patients should use the same modality.
Gardner
Blake I
BI
Cardiovascular Department, Intermountain Medical Center, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, UT 84157, USA. blake.gardner@imail.org
Bingham
Scott E
SE
Allen
Marvin R
MR
Blatter
Duane D
DD
Anderson
Jeffrey L
JL
D000368:Aged; D002306:Cardiac Volume; D004452:Echocardiography / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007090:Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional / Q000379:methods*; D019028:Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cine / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2005;7(4):671-5
16136857
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 1999;1(1):7-21
11550343
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1983 Sep;2(3):506-13
6875114
Circulation. 1977 Aug;56(2):273-8
872321
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2002 Mar;15(3):275-90
11875394
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1982 Dec 10;107(49):1872-7
7140570
Circulation. 2003 Aug 12;108(6):647-53
12912794
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006 Jun;186(6 Suppl 2):S357-65
16714609
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 1989 Nov-Dec;2(6):398-407
2516742
Circulation. 2003 Sep 2;108(9):1146-62
12952829
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003 Mar;17(3):323-9
12594722
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2006;8(3):417-26
16755827
Am J Cardiol. 2007 Feb 1;99(3):300-6
17261386
Am J Cardiol. 2002 Jul 1;90(1):29-34
12088775
Circulation. 2002 Jan 29;105(4):539-42
11815441