...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology >What is the Primary Source of Discordance in Strain Measurement Between Vendors: Imaging or Analysis?
【24h】

What is the Primary Source of Discordance in Strain Measurement Between Vendors: Imaging or Analysis?

机译：供应商之间的应变测量不一致的主要来源是：成像还是分析？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Strain imaging quantifies myocardial deformation in both overt and subclinical myocardial diseases. Strain values have been shown to vary between vendors. The aim of this study was to investigate whether this variation reflects differences of image characteristics or analysis software. We enrolled 45 patients (age 54 ± 14 years, 26 males) who underwent two echocardiograms on the same day with two different commercially available ultrasound systems. Three apical views were analyzed by two vendor-specific and two digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM)-based software packages. The results were compared in two ways; comparison of global longitudinal strain (GLS) by nine different combinations of ultrasound systems and strain software, and comparison of strains by wall, view and global levels. Comparison of GLS between two vendor-specific software packages yielded poor correlation (ρ = 0.35). The use of the same software on the images from different vendors was concordant (ρ = 0.74 and 0.64; bias = 0.0 and -0.5). There were no significant differences in correlation coefficients among the comparisons with DICOM-based software. There was no significant difference in correlation coefficients among three views (4CV vs. 3CV, p = 0.44; 4CV vs. 2CV, p = 0.47). Comparison of walls showed the septum to have the best correlation (ρ = 0.73), and the posterior wall (ρ = 0.31; p = 0.005 vs. septum) had the worst. Use of the same software to measure strain in images from different vendors minimizes the variation of GLS. Post-processing is the most important determinant in inter-vendor variation, with differences in acquisition having a small effect. These findings should be examined and confirmed with other combinations of ultrasound machines and deformation software.
机译：应变成像可以量化明显和亚临床心肌疾病中的心肌变形。应变值已显示在供应商之间有所不同。这项研究的目的是调查这种变化是否反映了图像特征或分析软件的差异。我们招募了45名患者（年龄54±14岁，男性26位），他们在同一天接受了两种超声心动图检查，并使用了两种不同的市售超声系统。通过两个基于销售商的特定软件包和两个基于医学的数字成像和通信（DICOM）软件包分析了三个顶视图。通过两种方式比较结果：通过超声系统和应变软件的九种不同组合对全球纵向应变（GLS）进行比较，并按壁面，视野和整体水平对应变进行比较。比较两个特定于供应商的软件包之间的GLS会得出较差的相关性（ρ= 0.35）。在来自不同供应商的图像上使用相同的软件是一致的（ρ= 0.74和0.64; bias = 0.0和-0.5）。与基于DICOM的软件相比，相关系数之间没有显着差异。三个视图之间的相关系数没有显着差异（4CV与3CV，p = 0.44; 4CV与2CV，p = 0.47）。壁的比较显示隔垫具有最佳相关性（ρ= 0.73），而后壁（ρ= 0.31; p = 0.005对隔垫）最差。使用相同的软件来测量来自不同供应商的图像中的应变，可以最大程度地减少GLS的变化。在供应商之间的差异中，后处理是最重要的决定因素，而获取差异会产生很小的影响。这些发现应与超声波机器和变形软件的其他组合一起检查和确认。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号