European Radiology

, Volume 16, Issue 7, pp 1424–1433 | Cite as

Accurate estimation of global and regional cardiac function by retrospectively gated multidetector row computed tomography

Comparison with cine magnetic resonance imaging
  • Bénédicte Belge
  • Emmanuel Coche
  • Agnès Pasquet
  • Jean-Louis J. Vanoverschelde
  • Bernhard L. Gerber


Retrospective reconstruction of ECG-gated images at different parts of the cardiac cycle allows the assessment of cardiac function by multi-detector row CT (MDCT) at the time of non-invasive coronary imaging. We compared the accuracy of such measurements by MDCT to cine magnetic resonance (MR). Forty patients underwent the assessment of global and regional cardiac function by 16-slice MDCT and cine MR. Left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes estimated by MDCT (134±51 and 67±56 ml) were similar to those by MR (137±57 and 70±60 ml, respectively; both P=NS) and strongly correlated (r=0.92 and r=0.95, respectively; both P<0.001). Consequently, LV ejection fractions by MDCT and MR were also similar (55±21 vs. 56±21%; P=NS) and highly correlated (r=0.95; P<0.001). Regional end-diastolic and end-systolic wall thicknesses by MDCT were highly correlated (r=0.84 and r=0.92, respectively; both P<0.001), but significantly lower than by MR (8.3±1.8 vs. 8.8±1.9 mm and 12.7±3.4 vs. 13.3±3.5 mm, respectively; both P<0.001). Values of regional wall thickening by MDCT and MR were similar (54±30 vs. 51±31%; P=NS) and also correlated well (r=0.91; P<0.001). Retrospectively gated MDCT can accurately estimate LV volumes, EF and regional LV wall thickening compared to cine MR.


Multidetector CT MRI Cardiac function Ejection fraction 



We would like to thank Alain Vlassenbroeck and Mani Vembar from Philips Medical Systems for technical assistance.


  1. 1.
    Achenbach S, Giesler T, Ropers D, Ulzheimer S, Derlien H, Schulte C et al (2001) Detection of coronary artery stenoses by contrast-enhanced, retrospectively electrocardiographically-gated, multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 103:2535–2538PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ropers D, Baum U, Pohle K, Anders K, Ulzheimer S, Ohnesorge B et al (2003) Detection of coronary artery stenoses with thin-slice multi-detector row spiral computed tomography and multiplanar reconstruction.Circulation 107:664–666CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nieman K, Cademartiri F, Lemos PA, Raaijmakers R, Pattynama PM, de Feyter PJ (2002) Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 106:2051–2054CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kopp AF, Schroeder S, Kuettner A, Heuschmid M, Georg C, Ohnesorge B et al (2001) Coronary arteries: retrospectively ECG-gated multi-detector row CT angiography with selective optimization of the image reconstruction window. Radiology 221:683–688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wintersperger BJ, Nikolaou K (2005) Basics of cardiac MDCT: techniques and contrast application. Eur Radiol 15(Suppl 2):B2–B9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mochizuki T, Murase K, Higashino H, Koyama Y, Doi M, Miyagawa M et al (2000) Two- and three-dimensional CT ventriculography: a new application of helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:203–208PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Juergens KU, Grude M, Fallenberg EM, Opitz C, Wichter T, Heindel W et al (2002) Using ECG-gated multidetector CT to evaluate global left ventricular myocardial function in patients with coronary artery disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1545–1550PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dirksen MS, Bax JJ, de Roos A, Jukema JW, van der Geest RJ, Geleijns K et al (2002) Usefulness of dynamic multislice computed tomography of left ventricular function in unstable angina pectoris and comparison with echocardiography. Am J Cardiol 90:1157–1160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grude M, Juergens KU, Wichter T, Paul M, Fallenberg EM, Muller JG et al (2003) Evaluation of global left ventricular myocardial function with electrocardiogram-gated multidetector computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 38:653–661PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boehm T, Alkadhi H, Roffi M, Willmann JK, Desbiolles LM, Marincek B et al (2004) Time-effectiveness, observer-dependence, and accuracy of measurements of left ventricular ejection fraction using 4-channel MDCT. Rofo 176:529–537PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Juergens KU, Grude M, Maintz D, Fallenberg EM, Wichter T, Heindel W et al (2004) Multi-detector row CT of left ventricular function with dedicated analysis software versus MR imaging: initial experience. Radiology 230:403–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Vliegen HW, Salm LP et al (2004) Noninvasive angiography and assessment of left ventricular function using multislice computed tomography in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 27:2905–2910PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salm LP, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Schuijf JD, Vliegen HW, Lamb HJ et al (2005) Comprehensive assessment of patients after coronary artery bypass grafting by 16-detector-row computed tomography. Am Heart J 150:775–781CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Salm LP, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, van der Wall EE et al (2005) Noninvasive coronary imaging and assessment of left ventricular function using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 95:571–574CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schlosser T, Pagonidis K, Herborn CU, Hunold P, Waltering KU, Lauenstein TC et al (2005) Assessment of left ventricular parameters using 16-MDCT and new software for endocardial and epicardial border delineation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:765–773PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dirksen MS, Jukema JW, Bax JJ, Lamb HJ, Boersma E, Tuinenburg JC et al (2005) Cardiac multidetector-row computed tomography in patients with unstable angina. Am J Cardiol 95:457–461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Juergens KU, Fischbach R (2005) Left ventricular function studied with MDCT. Eur Radiol 15(1)111–117 JanPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Begemann PG, van Stevendaal U, Manzke R, Stork A, Weiss F, Nolte-Ernsting C et al (2005) Evaluation of spatial and temporal resolution for ECG-gated 16-row multidetector CT using a dynamic cardiac phantom. Eur Radiol 15:1015–1026PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Coche E, Vynckier S, Prignot M (2006) Radiation dose during diagnostic work-up of pulmonary embolism: a comparative phantom study with 4-, 16-detector row CT scanners with dose modulation program and digital pulmonary angiography. Radiology. in pressGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schiller NB, Shah PM, Crawford M, DeMaria A, Devereux R, Feigenbaum H et al (1989) Recommendations for quantitation of the left ventricle by two-dimensional echocardiography. American Society of Echocardiography Committee on Standards, Subcommittee on Quantitation of Two-Dimensional Echocardiograms. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2:358–367PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Juergens KU, Maintz D, Grude M, Boese JM, Heimes B, Fallenberg EM et al (2005) Multi-detector row computed tomography of the heart: does a multi-segment reconstruction algorithm improve left ventricular volume measurements? Eur Radiol 15:111–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grass M, Manzke R, Nielsen T, Koken P, Proksa R, Natanzon M et al (2003) Helical cardiac cone beam reconstruction using retrospective ECG gating. Phys Med Biol 48:3069–3084CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, Vliegen HW, van der Wall EE et al (2005) Noninvasive evaluation of the coronary arteries with multislice computed tomography in hypertensive patients. Hypertension 45:227–232CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Salm LP, Schuijf JD, de Roos A, Lamb HJ, Vliegen HW, Jukema JW et al (2005) Global and regional left ventricular function assessment with 16-detector row CT: comparison with echocardiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Eur J EchocardiogrGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yamamuro M, Tadamura E, Kubo S, Toyoda H, Nishina T, Ohba M et al (2005) Cardiac functional analysis with multi-detector row CT and segmental reconstruction algorithm: comparison with echocardiography, SPECT, and MR imaging. Radiology 234:381–390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Spuentrup E, Busch P, Wildberger JE et al (2005) Sixteen-slice spiral CT versus MR imaging for the assessment of left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction. Eur Radiol 15:714–720CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hamer AW, Takayama M, Abraham KA, Roche AHG, Kerr AR, Williams BF et al (1994) End-systolic volume and long term survival after coronary artery bypass graft surgery in patients with impaired left ventricular function. Circulation 90:2899–2904PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Quinones MA, Greenberg BH, Kopelen HA, Koilpillai C, Limacher MC, Shindler DM et al (2000) Echocardiographic predictors of clinical outcome in patients with left ventricular dysfunction enrolled in the SOLVD registry and trials: significance of left ventricular hypertrophy. Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 35:1237–1244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Haider AW, Larson MG, Benjamin EJ, Levy D (1998) Increased left ventricular mass and hypertrophy are associated with increased risk for sudden death. J Am Coll Cardiol 32:1454–1459CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Verdecchia P, Carini G, Circo A, Dovellini E, Giovannini E, Lombardo M et al (2001) Left ventricular mass and cardiovascular morbidity in essential hypertension: the MAVI study. J Am Coll Cardiol 38:1829–1835CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wong M, Staszewsky L, Latini R, Barlera S, Glazer R, Aknay N et al (2004) Severity of left ventricular remodeling defines outcomes and response to therapy in heart failure: valsartan heart failure trial (Val-HeFT) echocardiographic data. J Am Coll Cardiol 43:2022–2027CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Connolly HM, Oh JK, Schaff HV, Roger VL, Osborn SL, Hodge DO et al (2000) Severe aortic stenosis with low transvalvular gradient and severe left ventricular dysfunction:result of aortic valve replacement in 52 patients. Circulation 101:1940–1946PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mock MB, Rinqvist I, Fisher LD, Davis KD, Chaitman BR, Kouchoukos NT et al (1982) Survival in medically treated patients in the coronary artery surgery study (CASS) registry. Circulation 66:562–568PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Spirito P, Bellone P, Harris KM, Bernabo P, Bruzzi P, Maron BJ (2000) Magnitude of left ventricular hypertrophy and risk of sudden death in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 342:1778–1785CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baer FM, Voth E, Schneider CA, Theissen P, Schicha H, Sechtem U (1995) Comparison of low-dose dobutamine-gradient-echo magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with chronic coronary artery disease. A functional and morphological approach to the detection of residual myocardial viability. Circulation 91:1006–1015PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bonow RO, Bacharach SL, Crawford-Green C, Green MV (1989) Influence of temporal smoothing on quantitation of left ventricular function by gated blood pool scintigraphy. Am J Cardiol 64:921–925CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Setser RM, Fischer SE, Lorenz CH (2000) Quantification of left ventricular function with magnetic resonance images acquired in real time. J Magn Reson Imaging 12:430–438PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bénédicte Belge
    • 1
  • Emmanuel Coche
    • 2
  • Agnès Pasquet
    • 1
  • Jean-Louis J. Vanoverschelde
    • 1
  • Bernhard L. Gerber
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Division of CardiologyUniversité Catholique de LouvainBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Division of RadiologyUniversité Catholique de LouvainBrusselsBelgium
  3. 3.Department of CardiologyCliniques Universitaires St. Luc UCLWoluwe St. LambertBelgium

Personalised recommendations