Aortic length measurements for pulse wave velocity calculation: Manual 2D vs automated 3D centreline extraction

Arna Van Engelen, Miguel Silva Vieira, Isma Rafiq, Marina Cecelja, Torben Schneider, Hubrecht De Bliek, C. Alberto Figueroa, Tarique Hussain, Rene M. Botnar, Jordi Alastruey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is a biomarker for the intrinsic stiffness of the aortic wall, and has been shown to be predictive for cardiovascular events. It can be assessed using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) from the delay between phase-contrast flow waveforms at two or more locations in the aorta, and the distance on CMR images between those locations. This study aimed to investigate the impact of different distance measurement methods on PWV. We present and evaluate an algorithm for automated centreline tracking in 3D images, and compare PWV calculations using distances derived from 3D images to those obtained from a conventional 2D oblique-sagittal image of the aorta. Methods: We included 35 patients from a twin cohort, and 20 post-coarctation repair patients. Phase-contrast flow was acquired in the ascending, descending and diaphragmatic aorta. A 3D centreline tracking algorithm is presented and evaluated on a subset of 30 subjects, on three CMR sequences: balanced steady-state free precession (SSFP), black-blood double inversion recovery turbo spin echo, and contrast-enhanced CMR angiography. Aortic lengths are subsequently compared between measurements from a 2D oblique-sagittal plane, and a 3D geometry. Results: The error in length of automated 3D centreline tracking compared with manual annotations ranged from 2.4 [1.8-4.3] mm (mean [IQR], black-blood) to 6.4 [4.7-8.9] mm (SSFP). The impact on PWV was below 0.5m/s (<5%). Differences between 2D and 3D centreline length were significant for the majority of our experiments (p < 0.05). Individual differences in PWV were larger than 0.5m/s in 15% of all cases (thoracic aorta) and 37% when studying the aortic arch only. Finally, the difference between end-diastolic and end-systolic 2D centreline lengths was statistically significant (p < 0.01), but resulted in small differences in PWV (0.08 [0.04 - 0.10]m/s). Conclusions: Automatic aortic centreline tracking in three commonly used CMR sequences is possible with good accuracy. The 3D length obtained from such sequences can differ considerably from lengths obtained from a 2D oblique-sagittal plane, depending on aortic curvature, adequate planning of the oblique-sagittal plane, and patient motion between acquisitions. For accurate PWV measurements we recommend using 3D centrelines.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number32
JournalJournal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Volume19
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 8 2017

Fingerprint

Pulse Wave Analysis
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Thoracic Aorta
Aorta
Vascular Stiffness
Magnetic Resonance Angiography
Individuality
Biomarkers

Keywords

  • Aortic stiffness
  • Cardiovascular magnetic resonance
  • Centreline
  • Pulse wave velocity
  • Semi-automated tracking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Family Practice

Cite this

Van Engelen, A., Silva Vieira, M., Rafiq, I., Cecelja, M., Schneider, T., De Bliek, H., ... Alastruey, J. (2017). Aortic length measurements for pulse wave velocity calculation: Manual 2D vs automated 3D centreline extraction. Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 19(1), [32]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-017-0341-y

Aortic length measurements for pulse wave velocity calculation : Manual 2D vs automated 3D centreline extraction. / Van Engelen, Arna; Silva Vieira, Miguel; Rafiq, Isma; Cecelja, Marina; Schneider, Torben; De Bliek, Hubrecht; Figueroa, C. Alberto; Hussain, Tarique; Botnar, Rene M.; Alastruey, Jordi.

In: Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Vol. 19, No. 1, 32, 08.03.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Van Engelen, A, Silva Vieira, M, Rafiq, I, Cecelja, M, Schneider, T, De Bliek, H, Figueroa, CA, Hussain, T, Botnar, RM & Alastruey, J 2017, 'Aortic length measurements for pulse wave velocity calculation: Manual 2D vs automated 3D centreline extraction', Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, vol. 19, no. 1, 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-017-0341-y
Van Engelen, Arna ; Silva Vieira, Miguel ; Rafiq, Isma ; Cecelja, Marina ; Schneider, Torben ; De Bliek, Hubrecht ; Figueroa, C. Alberto ; Hussain, Tarique ; Botnar, Rene M. ; Alastruey, Jordi. / Aortic length measurements for pulse wave velocity calculation : Manual 2D vs automated 3D centreline extraction. In: Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. 2017 ; Vol. 19, No. 1.
@article{76c458e63b5147d8b9c587868c1d729e,
title = "Aortic length measurements for pulse wave velocity calculation: Manual 2D vs automated 3D centreline extraction",
abstract = "Background: Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is a biomarker for the intrinsic stiffness of the aortic wall, and has been shown to be predictive for cardiovascular events. It can be assessed using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) from the delay between phase-contrast flow waveforms at two or more locations in the aorta, and the distance on CMR images between those locations. This study aimed to investigate the impact of different distance measurement methods on PWV. We present and evaluate an algorithm for automated centreline tracking in 3D images, and compare PWV calculations using distances derived from 3D images to those obtained from a conventional 2D oblique-sagittal image of the aorta. Methods: We included 35 patients from a twin cohort, and 20 post-coarctation repair patients. Phase-contrast flow was acquired in the ascending, descending and diaphragmatic aorta. A 3D centreline tracking algorithm is presented and evaluated on a subset of 30 subjects, on three CMR sequences: balanced steady-state free precession (SSFP), black-blood double inversion recovery turbo spin echo, and contrast-enhanced CMR angiography. Aortic lengths are subsequently compared between measurements from a 2D oblique-sagittal plane, and a 3D geometry. Results: The error in length of automated 3D centreline tracking compared with manual annotations ranged from 2.4 [1.8-4.3] mm (mean [IQR], black-blood) to 6.4 [4.7-8.9] mm (SSFP). The impact on PWV was below 0.5m/s (<5{\%}). Differences between 2D and 3D centreline length were significant for the majority of our experiments (p < 0.05). Individual differences in PWV were larger than 0.5m/s in 15{\%} of all cases (thoracic aorta) and 37{\%} when studying the aortic arch only. Finally, the difference between end-diastolic and end-systolic 2D centreline lengths was statistically significant (p < 0.01), but resulted in small differences in PWV (0.08 [0.04 - 0.10]m/s). Conclusions: Automatic aortic centreline tracking in three commonly used CMR sequences is possible with good accuracy. The 3D length obtained from such sequences can differ considerably from lengths obtained from a 2D oblique-sagittal plane, depending on aortic curvature, adequate planning of the oblique-sagittal plane, and patient motion between acquisitions. For accurate PWV measurements we recommend using 3D centrelines.",
keywords = "Aortic stiffness, Cardiovascular magnetic resonance, Centreline, Pulse wave velocity, Semi-automated tracking",
author = "{Van Engelen}, Arna and {Silva Vieira}, Miguel and Isma Rafiq and Marina Cecelja and Torben Schneider and {De Bliek}, Hubrecht and Figueroa, {C. Alberto} and Tarique Hussain and Botnar, {Rene M.} and Jordi Alastruey",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "8",
doi = "10.1186/s12968-017-0341-y",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
journal = "Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance",
issn = "1097-6647",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Aortic length measurements for pulse wave velocity calculation

T2 - Manual 2D vs automated 3D centreline extraction

AU - Van Engelen, Arna

AU - Silva Vieira, Miguel

AU - Rafiq, Isma

AU - Cecelja, Marina

AU - Schneider, Torben

AU - De Bliek, Hubrecht

AU - Figueroa, C. Alberto

AU - Hussain, Tarique

AU - Botnar, Rene M.

AU - Alastruey, Jordi

PY - 2017/3/8

Y1 - 2017/3/8

N2 - Background: Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is a biomarker for the intrinsic stiffness of the aortic wall, and has been shown to be predictive for cardiovascular events. It can be assessed using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) from the delay between phase-contrast flow waveforms at two or more locations in the aorta, and the distance on CMR images between those locations. This study aimed to investigate the impact of different distance measurement methods on PWV. We present and evaluate an algorithm for automated centreline tracking in 3D images, and compare PWV calculations using distances derived from 3D images to those obtained from a conventional 2D oblique-sagittal image of the aorta. Methods: We included 35 patients from a twin cohort, and 20 post-coarctation repair patients. Phase-contrast flow was acquired in the ascending, descending and diaphragmatic aorta. A 3D centreline tracking algorithm is presented and evaluated on a subset of 30 subjects, on three CMR sequences: balanced steady-state free precession (SSFP), black-blood double inversion recovery turbo spin echo, and contrast-enhanced CMR angiography. Aortic lengths are subsequently compared between measurements from a 2D oblique-sagittal plane, and a 3D geometry. Results: The error in length of automated 3D centreline tracking compared with manual annotations ranged from 2.4 [1.8-4.3] mm (mean [IQR], black-blood) to 6.4 [4.7-8.9] mm (SSFP). The impact on PWV was below 0.5m/s (<5%). Differences between 2D and 3D centreline length were significant for the majority of our experiments (p < 0.05). Individual differences in PWV were larger than 0.5m/s in 15% of all cases (thoracic aorta) and 37% when studying the aortic arch only. Finally, the difference between end-diastolic and end-systolic 2D centreline lengths was statistically significant (p < 0.01), but resulted in small differences in PWV (0.08 [0.04 - 0.10]m/s). Conclusions: Automatic aortic centreline tracking in three commonly used CMR sequences is possible with good accuracy. The 3D length obtained from such sequences can differ considerably from lengths obtained from a 2D oblique-sagittal plane, depending on aortic curvature, adequate planning of the oblique-sagittal plane, and patient motion between acquisitions. For accurate PWV measurements we recommend using 3D centrelines.

AB - Background: Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is a biomarker for the intrinsic stiffness of the aortic wall, and has been shown to be predictive for cardiovascular events. It can be assessed using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) from the delay between phase-contrast flow waveforms at two or more locations in the aorta, and the distance on CMR images between those locations. This study aimed to investigate the impact of different distance measurement methods on PWV. We present and evaluate an algorithm for automated centreline tracking in 3D images, and compare PWV calculations using distances derived from 3D images to those obtained from a conventional 2D oblique-sagittal image of the aorta. Methods: We included 35 patients from a twin cohort, and 20 post-coarctation repair patients. Phase-contrast flow was acquired in the ascending, descending and diaphragmatic aorta. A 3D centreline tracking algorithm is presented and evaluated on a subset of 30 subjects, on three CMR sequences: balanced steady-state free precession (SSFP), black-blood double inversion recovery turbo spin echo, and contrast-enhanced CMR angiography. Aortic lengths are subsequently compared between measurements from a 2D oblique-sagittal plane, and a 3D geometry. Results: The error in length of automated 3D centreline tracking compared with manual annotations ranged from 2.4 [1.8-4.3] mm (mean [IQR], black-blood) to 6.4 [4.7-8.9] mm (SSFP). The impact on PWV was below 0.5m/s (<5%). Differences between 2D and 3D centreline length were significant for the majority of our experiments (p < 0.05). Individual differences in PWV were larger than 0.5m/s in 15% of all cases (thoracic aorta) and 37% when studying the aortic arch only. Finally, the difference between end-diastolic and end-systolic 2D centreline lengths was statistically significant (p < 0.01), but resulted in small differences in PWV (0.08 [0.04 - 0.10]m/s). Conclusions: Automatic aortic centreline tracking in three commonly used CMR sequences is possible with good accuracy. The 3D length obtained from such sequences can differ considerably from lengths obtained from a 2D oblique-sagittal plane, depending on aortic curvature, adequate planning of the oblique-sagittal plane, and patient motion between acquisitions. For accurate PWV measurements we recommend using 3D centrelines.

KW - Aortic stiffness

KW - Cardiovascular magnetic resonance

KW - Centreline

KW - Pulse wave velocity

KW - Semi-automated tracking

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85014528016&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85014528016&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12968-017-0341-y

DO - 10.1186/s12968-017-0341-y

M3 - Article

C2 - 28270208

AN - SCOPUS:85014528016

VL - 19

JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

SN - 1097-6647

IS - 1

M1 - 32

ER -