The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Feasibility and Accuracy of Different Techniques of Two-Dimensional Speckle Based Strain and Validation With Harmonic Phase Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND Different 2-dimensional speckle-based strain techniques have been developed to overcome the problem of angle dependency with Doppler-based strain. However, their relative accuracy has not been assessed. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility and accuracy of 2 such techniques (velocity vector imaging [VVI] and automated function imaging [AFI]), using tagged harmonic phase (HARP) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a reference standard. METHODS Thirty patients with known or suspected ischemic heart disease underwent measurement of peak systolic longitudinal, radial, and circumferential Lagrangian strain with all 3 techniques using a 16-segment model. The extent of scar tissue in each segment was determined using contrast-enhanced MRI. RESULTS The measurement of myocardial strain in all 3 directions was highly feasible with both VVI and AFI. Longitudinal strain was underestimated by both VVI (-11 +/- 8%; P < .01) and AFI (-12 +/- 6%; P < .01) in comparison with HARP MRI (-14 +/- 5%), and radial strain was underestimated by VVI (14 +/- 18% vs 23 +/- 7%; P < .01). All strain measurements with AFI showed better correlation and agreement with HARP MRI compared with VVI. Circumferential strain with AFI had the greatest accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.74, P < .001) for the prediction of scar tissue on MRI. CONCLUSIONS Two-dimensional strain measured with AFI has significantly better accuracy than VVI. Circumferential strain with AFI has the best discriminative ability for the detection of regional myocardial dysfunction.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Cited by
Voigt, J.-U., Pedrizzetti, G., Lysyansky, P., Marwick, T. H., Houle, H., Baumann, R., Pedri, S., Ito, Y., Abe, Y., Metz, S., et al. (2015) · European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jeu184 · Cited by 1,304
Self-citationNegishi, K., Negishi, T., Hare, J. L., Haluska, B. A., Plana, J. C., & Marwick, T. H. (2013) · Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography · doi:10.1016/j.echo.2013.02.008 · Cited by 454
Self-citationDalen, H., Thorstensen, A., Aase, S. A., Ingul, C. B., Torp, H., Vatten, L. J., & Stoylen, A. (2010) · European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · doi:10.1093/ejechocard/jep194 · Cited by 356
Dahou, A., Bartko, P. E., Capoulade, R., Clavel, M.-A., Mundigler, G., Grondin, S. L., Bergler-Klein, J., Burwash, I., Dumesnil, J. G., Sénéchal, M., et al. (2015) · Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging · doi:10.1161/circimaging.114.002117 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Bansal, M., Cho, G.-Y., Chan, J., Leano, R., Haluska, B. A., & Marwick, T. H.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-12
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1318-1325
- ISSN
- 0894-7317 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2033131983
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.