Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine whether right ventricular (RV) volumes are more accurately and reproducibly measured by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in an axial orientation or in a short-axis orientation in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD).
Background: There is little agreement on the most suitable imaging plane for RV volumetric analysis in the setting of abnormal RV physiology.
Methods: Measurements of RV volumes from datasets acquired in axial and short-axis orientations were made in 50 patients with CHD. RV stroke volumes (SV) calculated using these 2 methods were compared with forward flow measured in the pulmonary trunk by phase contrast (PC) imaging. Repeated volume measurements were made to assess intraobserver and interobserver reliability. Bland-Altman plots and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were used for all analyses of agreement.
Results: Analysis of all subjects revealed a statistically significant difference in interobserver reliability of RV end-systolic volume (ESV) measurements that favored the axial method (p = 0.047). The magnitude of measurement differences between observers in this case was small (-2.8 ml/m(2); 95% confidence interval: -5.6 to 0.0). There was no difference between the 2 contouring methods in terms of intraobserver reliability in measurements of RV end-diastolic volume (EDV), ESV, ejection fraction, or SV (p > 0.05 in all cases). In subjects with RV EDV ≥ 150 ml/m(2), RV SV measured using axial contours yielded better agreement with forward flow measured in the pulmonary trunk (CCC = 0.63) than did measurements made using short-axis contours (CCC = 0.56; p = 0.007).
Conclusions: Trends favoring the axial orientation in terms of reproducibility were not clinically significant. In subjects with RV EDV ≥ 150 ml/m(2), the axial orientation yields RV volume measurements that agree more closely with flow measured in the pulmonary trunk than does the short-axis orientation.
Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.