Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMoody, William E
dc.contributor.authorHudsmith, Lucy E
dc.contributor.authorHolloway, Ben
dc.contributor.authorTreibel, Thomas A
dc.contributor.authorDavies, Rhodri
dc.contributor.authorKozor, Rebecca
dc.contributor.authorHamilton-Craig, Christian
dc.contributor.authorEdwards, Nicola C
dc.contributor.authorBradlow, William M
dc.contributor.authorMoon, James C
dc.contributor.authorSteeds, Richard P
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-04T03:43:07Z
dc.date.available2019-10-04T03:43:07Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn1053-1807
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/jmri.26689
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/388074
dc.description.abstractTo the Editor: Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the reference standard for accurately quantifying cardiac volumes, mass, and systolic function. Standardized methodology published almost a decade ago recommended short‐axis steady‐state free precession (SSFP) cine imaging,1 which remains the workhorse of most protocols today. Although the Society of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) recently acknowledged "moderate variability" in normal ranges, depending on the method of quantification,2 use of a single normal reference range has never been stipulated, rather that any reference range should be aligned with the reporting technique. In the earlier datasets derived from SSFP short‐axis imaging, manual contouring was used to delineate the endocardial border from the ventricular blood pool, resulting in an image resembling the "fjords of Norway," where papillary muscles and trabeculae were included in the left ventricular (LV) mass. A pooled meta‐analysis provided the largest reference range dataset (n = 288) using this "detailed" contouring technique.3 In contrast, in 2017 the UK Biobank project published normal reference ranges using ellipsoid "smoothed" contours of the compacted endocardial border, including 800 healthy subjects.4 It is unclear which of these methodologies are being used in real‐life clinical practice. To address this issue, we conducted an international survey examining contemporaneous cardiac MRI reporting practice.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherWiley
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom1336
dc.relation.ispartofpageto1338
dc.relation.ispartofissue4
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
dc.relation.ispartofvolume50
dc.subject.fieldofresearchEngineering
dc.subject.fieldofresearchMedical and Health Sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPhysical Sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode09
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode11
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode02
dc.titleVariation in cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial contouring: Insights from an international survey
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC3 - Articles (Letter/ Note)
dcterms.bibliographicCitationMoody, WE; Hudsmith, LE; Holloway, B; Treibel, TA; Davies, R; Kozor, R; Hamilton-Craig, C; Edwards, NC; Bradlow, WM; Moon, JC; Steeds, RP, Variation in cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial contouring: Insights from an international survey, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2019, 50 (4), pp. 1336-1338
dcterms.dateAccepted2019-02-06
dcterms.licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.date.updated2019-10-04T03:39:23Z
dc.description.versionPublished
gro.rights.copyright© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorHamilton-Craig, Christian


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record