↓ Skip to main content

Compressed sensing real-time cine cardiovascular magnetic resonance: accurate assessment of left ventricular function in a single-breath-hold

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Compressed sensing real-time cine cardiovascular magnetic resonance: accurate assessment of left ventricular function in a single-breath-hold
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12968-016-0271-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tomoyuki Kido, Teruhito Kido, Masashi Nakamura, Kouki Watanabe, Michaela Schmidt, Christoph Forman, Teruhito Mochizuki

Abstract

Cardiovascular cine magnetic resonance (CMR) accelerated by compressed sensing (CS) is used to assess left ventricular (LV) function. However, it is difficult for prospective CS cine CMR to capture the complete end-diastolic phase, which can lead to underestimation of the end-diastolic volume (EDV), stroke volume (SV), and ejection fraction (EF), compared to retrospective standard cine CMR. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic quality and accuracy of single-breath-hold full cardiac cycle CS cine CMR, acquired over two heart beats, to quantify LV volume in comparison to multi-breath-hold standard cine CMR. Eighty-one participants underwent standard segmented breath-hold cine and CS real-time cine CMR examinations to obtain a stack of eight contiguous short-axis images with same high spatial (1.7 × 1.7 mm(2)) and temporal resolution (41 ms). Two radiologists independently performed qualitative analysis of image quality (score, 1 [i.e., "nondiagnostic"] to 5 [i.e., "excellent"]) and quantitative analysis of the LV volume measurements. The total examination time was 113 ± 7 s for standard cine CMR and 24 ± 4 s for CS cine CMR (p < 0.0001). The CS cine image quality was slightly lower than standard cine (4.8 ± 0.5 for standard vs. 4.4 ± 0.5 for CS; p < 0.0001). However, all image quality scores for CS cine were above 4 (i.e., good). No significant differences existed between standard and CS cine MR for all quantitative LV measurements. The mean differences with 95 % confidence interval (CI), based on Bland-Altman analysis, were 1.3 mL (95 % CI, -14.6 - 17.2) for LV end-diastolic volume, 0.2 mL (95 % CI, -9.8 to10.3) for LV end-systolic volume, 1.1 mL (95 % CI, -10.5 to 12.7) for LV stroke volume, 1.0 g (95 % CI, -11.2 to 13.3) for LV mass, and 0.4 % (95 % CI, -4.8 - 5.6) for LV ejection fraction. The interobserver and intraobserver variability for CS cine MR ranged from -4.8 - 1.6 % and from -7.3 - 9.3 %, respectively, with slopes of the regressions ranging 0.88-1.0 and 0.86-1.03, respectively. Single-breath-hold full cardiac cycle CS real-time cine CMR could evaluate LV volume with excellent accuracy. It may replace multi-breath-hold standard cine CMR.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 88 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Other 9 10%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 20 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 37%
Engineering 11 12%
Computer Science 6 7%
Mathematics 2 2%
Physics and Astronomy 2 2%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 26 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 October 2017.
All research outputs
#5,350,777
of 25,522,520 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#361
of 1,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,494
of 353,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#7
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,522,520 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 353,007 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.