2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2017.06.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Standardized Delineation of Endocardial Boundaries in Three-Dimensional Left Ventricular Echocardiograms

Abstract: Comparing 3D LV tracings, the endocardial areas that are the most difficult to delineate were identified. The suggested protocol for LV tracing resulted in very good agreement among operators. The reference 3D meshes are available for online testing and ranking of LV tracing algorithms.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A 16-segment model was used and LV segments were scored as 0 if non-visible and 1 if visible (6). LV endocardial borders at ED were automatically tracked and manual adjustments were performed when needed (12,13). LV volumes, including LVEF and systolic dyssynchrony index (SDI), global longitudinal strain (GLS), and global circumferential strain (GCS); average peak segmental longitudinal, circumferential, radial, and principle tangential strains; and twist and rotational indices were calculated by the software.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A 16-segment model was used and LV segments were scored as 0 if non-visible and 1 if visible (6). LV endocardial borders at ED were automatically tracked and manual adjustments were performed when needed (12,13). LV volumes, including LVEF and systolic dyssynchrony index (SDI), global longitudinal strain (GLS), and global circumferential strain (GCS); average peak segmental longitudinal, circumferential, radial, and principle tangential strains; and twist and rotational indices were calculated by the software.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the last years, there have been several initiatives to better assess the variability and reproducibility of strain measurements. Clinical, industrial and academic instances put a lot of efforts to discuss and better harmonize segmentation and tracking techniques (Amzulescu et al 2019;Papachristidis et al 2017;Voigt et al 2015). State-of-the-art algorithms were evaluated on synthetic echocardiographic images for which ground-truth myocardial delineation and deformation are known (Alessandrini et al 2016;De Craene et al 2013;D'hooge et al 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, its quantification from imaging data raises several concerns: validation of the software, standardization of the measurements, and interpretation of the results. Several efforts have been recently deployed to address the first two issues, in terms of definitions and computational aspects (Papachristidis et al 2017;Voigt et al 2015), and performance assessment (Alessandrini et al 2016;De Craene et al 2013;D'hooge et al 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The identity of non-visible segments were recorded in a spreadsheet during analysis as some regions are known to be less feasible, such as the apex, anterior and anterolateral segments (12). A 16-segment model was used and LV segments were scored as 0 if non-visible and 1 if visible (6).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%