JACC
HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Coll Cardiol, 1985; 5:1369-1376
© 1985 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Friedman, B.
Right arrow Articles by DeMaria, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Friedman, B.
Right arrow Articles by DeMaria, A.

Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography in determination of cardiac dimensions in normal subjects

BJ Friedman, J Waters, OL Kwan, and AN DeMaria

No data exist regarding the ability of magnetic resonance imaging to assess cardiac size and performance in human beings. Therefore, measurements of cardiac dimensions by magnetic resonance imaging were compared with those obtained by two-dimensional echocardiography in 21 normal subjects. Magnetic resonance transverse cardiac sections were obtained during electrocardiographic gating using a spin echo pulse sequence. In normal subjects, magnetic resonance imaging yielded a range of values for cardiac dimensions having a similar standard deviation as that of two-dimensional echocardiography. Diastolic measurements of the aorta, left atrium, left ventricle and septum obtained by magnetic resonance imaging correlated well with those obtained by two-dimensional echocardiography (r = 0.82, 0.78, 0.81 and 0.75, respectively). The correlation coefficient of r = 0.35 observed for the posterior wall thickness was not surprising in view of the narrow range of normal values. Only a general correlation (r = 0.53) existed for the right ventricular diastolic dimension; this was probably related to the difficulty in obtaining representative measurements due to the complex geometry of this chamber. Failure of systolic dimension measurements by magnetic resonance imaging to correlate with those obtained by echocardiography is probably related to limitations of electrocardiographic gating, especially of determining the exact end-systolic frame. Although technically complex at present, magnetic resonance imaging does provide an additional noninvasive technique for measurement of cardiac size.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
H. Tandri, E. Castillo, V. A. Ferrari, K. Nasir, D. Dalal, C. Bomma, H. Calkins, and D. A. Bluemke
Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Dysplasia: Sensitivity, Specificity, and Observer Variability of Fat Detection Versus Functional Analysis of the Right Ventricle
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 5, 2006; 48(11): 2277 - 2284.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. F. Bruzzi, M. Remy-Jardin, D. Delhaye, A. Teisseire, C. Khalil, and J. Remy
When, Why, and How to Examine the Heart During Thoracic CT: Part 1, Basic Principles
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2006; 186(2): 324 - 332.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
A. A. W. Roest, A. de Roos, H. J. Lamb, W. A. Helbing, J. G. van den Aardweg, J. Doornbos, E. E. van der Wall, and P. Kunz
Tetralogy of Fallot: Postoperative Delayed Recovery of Left Ventricular Stroke Volume after Physical Exercise--Assessment with Fast MR Imaging
Radiology, January 1, 2003; 226(1): 278 - 284.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
E. E. van der Wall, H. W. Vliegen, A. de Roos, and A. V.G. Bruschke
Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Coronary Artery Disease
Circulation, November 1, 1995; 92(9): 2723 - 2739.
[Abstract] [Full Text]




HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK
Copyright © 1985 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.