Performance of different myocardial tissue tracking algorithms and acquisition-based strain imaging to characterise myocardial pathology

Background Myocardial deformation imaging is superior in risk-stratification compared to volumetric approaches. Myocardial Feature-Tracking (FT) allows easy post-processing of routinely acquired cine images. Since there is no clear recommendation regarding FT post-processing we sought to compare different FT-strains with reference standard techniques including tagging and strain encoded (SENC) magnetic resonance imaging. Methods CMR-FT software from 4 different vendors (TomTec, Medis, Circle, Neosoft), CMR tagging (Segment) and fastSENC (MyoStrain) were used to determine left ventricular (LV) global longitudinal and circumferential strains (GLS and GCS) in 12 healthy volunteers and 12 heart failure patients. Variability and agreements were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients, coefficients of variation and Bland Altman plots. Results Compared to tagging, FT-based strain was software independently significantly higher except for GCS using Medis (p=0.178). Compared to fSENC, mean-differences of GLS were smaller within a range of ±1.5%. For GCS this only applied to CVI and Medis (7%) or Neosoft (>4%). Absolute agreements comparing FT to tagging were best for CVI (GLS ICC0.70) and Medis (GCS ICC0.85). Compared to fSENC agreement of GLS was generally excellent (ICC>0.77), but only CVI and Medis revealed excellent agreement for GCS (ICC0.88 and 0.85). Consistency and correlation of GLS were software independently high compared with tagging and fSENC (ICC>0.86, r>0.76) while being lower for GCS (ICC>0.68, r>0.72). Conclusion Although agreement differs between deformation assessment approaches, consistency and correlation are high irrespective of the method chosen, thus indicating reliable strain assessment. Further standardisation and introduction of uniform references is warranted for clinical routine implementation. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): DZHK - German Centre for Cardiovascular Research