Normal left atrial strain and strain rate using cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking in healthy volunteers

Abstract

Aims The aim of our study was to establish normal ranges for left atrial (LA) strain and strain rate using cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking (CMR-FT), LA sphericity index, and to compare LA strain using CMR-FT with 2D-speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) in a healthy population. Methods and results A total of 112 volunteers (45 male, 67 female) had adequate tracking for analysis on CMR-FT (Circle Cardiovascular Imaging, Calgary, Canada). The median age was 42 years (range 19–79 years, interquartile range 30–53 years). LA reservoir, conduit, booster strain, strain rate using CMR-FT, and sphericity index were evaluated. Of the 112 volunteers, 91 patients had adequate tracking on 2D-STE using three commonly applied zero-baseline time reference methods: R-R gating, P-P gating, and volume gating (defining end-systole at the LA maximum and end-diastole at the LA minimum). The LA strain, strain rate using CMR-FT, and sphericity index were reported and comparable between both genders (P > 0.05 for all). The LA booster function including strain and strain rate increased significantly with age (P < 0.001 for all), while the LA conduit function gradually decreased. In comparison with STE, the LA reservoir strain was comparable between CMR and volume-gating methods (38.48 ± 9.31 vs. 36.77 ± 6.46; P = 0.13) but not with R-R and P-P gating methods (P < 0.001 for all). LA strain, strain rate, and sphericity index using CMR-FT had good intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility. Conclusion LA strain, strain rate using CMR-FT, and sphericity index can be quickly assessed with good intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility.

Incremental value of left atrial booster and reservoir strain in predicting atrial fibrillation in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance study

“…The absolute values of LA strain reported in this study were lower than those reported elsewhere [ 36 ], though comparable with some studies using CMR myocardial feature tracking. Values from healthy, yet elderly controls in studies by Evin et al [ 37 ] and Lamy et al [ 38 ] matched our relatively old and obese control group closely [ 37 , 38 ].…”

Reproducibility of left atrial function using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging

“…Most studies assessing reproducibility of an imaging technique focus on inter-and intra-observer variability [32][33][34]. However, whilst important, observer variability does not address the multiple potential sources of variability when assessing the LA function, including image planning and acquisition, inclusion or exclusion of pulmonary veins/LA appendage from the LA volume as well as day-to-day physiological variation and filling status of the subject.…”

Quantification of Myocardial Deformation Applying CMR-Feature-Tracking—All About the Left Ventricle?

“…Quantification of RV and atrial deformation is challenging due to thin-walled anatomy, complex geometry and single plane analyses especially of the right heart, but CMR imaging has been shown to offer great potential for accurate assessment of these cardiac compartments [15]. Consequently, both RV [29,30] and atrial [28,31,32] deformation analyses are coming to the fore in current CMR-FT-based research, proving feasibility, generating reference values, demonstrating reproducibility and utilizing RV as well as atrial CMR-FT parameters in various cardiac diseases. In detail, similar to LV GLS analyses RV longitudinal strain evaluations can be derived from 4-chamber long-axis views.…”