FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2920922017> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2920922017 endingPage "632.e11" @default.
• W2920922017 startingPage "624" @default.
• W2920922017 abstract "•Layer-specific SLS does not help with detection of scars. •Layer-specific SLS shows significant differences among vendors. •Test-retest variability of layer-specific SLS is similar for endocardium and midwall. •No strong evidence favors the use of a certain myocardial layer for strain measurements. Background Segmental longitudinal strain (SLS) is reported to be vendor specific. Despite standardization efforts, vendors still use different myocardial layers for strain measurements. It is unclear, however, which layer is the most favorable for clinical purposes. Therefore, in this study we evaluated the reproducibility, accuracy, and scar detection ability of SLS measurements from different myocardial layers. Methods In data sets of 58 patients with prior myocardial infarction and five healthy volunteers, we measured the intervendor bias, the relative test-retest variability, and scar discrimination ability of endocardial and midwall SLS, using software packages from four different companies (GE, Siemens, Toshiba, and TomTec). Cardiac magnetic resonance delayed enhancement images were used as the reference standard of scar definition. Results Variability of SLS measurements was significant among the vendors for both midwall and endocardium. In addition, relative errors of SLS measurements varied considerably among vendors (P < .001 for both layers). Comparisons of test-retest errors from different layers for individual vendors did not show any significant differences. Regardless of the vendor, both endocardial and midwall strain values were decreased in scarred segments. Endocardial to midwall ratio of strain measurements showed no difference between scar-free and scarred segments. Endocardial and midwall strain parameters showed no significant difference in scar detection capability. Conclusions Layer-specific SLS measurements vary significantly among vendors. Endocardial and midwall SLS measurements have a high yet comparable test-retest variability. Combining layer-specific SLS measurements does not provide additional information for detection of regional functional abnormalities. Our results do not provide evidence to favor the use of one myocardial layer over another. Segmental longitudinal strain (SLS) is reported to be vendor specific. Despite standardization efforts, vendors still use different myocardial layers for strain measurements. It is unclear, however, which layer is the most favorable for clinical purposes. Therefore, in this study we evaluated the reproducibility, accuracy, and scar detection ability of SLS measurements from different myocardial layers. In data sets of 58 patients with prior myocardial infarction and five healthy volunteers, we measured the intervendor bias, the relative test-retest variability, and scar discrimination ability of endocardial and midwall SLS, using software packages from four different companies (GE, Siemens, Toshiba, and TomTec). Cardiac magnetic resonance delayed enhancement images were used as the reference standard of scar definition. Variability of SLS measurements was significant among the vendors for both midwall and endocardium. In addition, relative errors of SLS measurements varied considerably among vendors (P < .001 for both layers). Comparisons of test-retest errors from different layers for individual vendors did not show any significant differences. Regardless of the vendor, both endocardial and midwall strain values were decreased in scarred segments. Endocardial to midwall ratio of strain measurements showed no difference between scar-free and scarred segments. Endocardial and midwall strain parameters showed no significant difference in scar detection capability. Layer-specific SLS measurements vary significantly among vendors. Endocardial and midwall SLS measurements have a high yet comparable test-retest variability. Combining layer-specific SLS measurements does not provide additional information for detection of regional functional abnormalities. Our results do not provide evidence to favor the use of one myocardial layer over another." @default.
• W2920922017 created "2019-03-22" @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5000581939 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5004312980 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5016878366 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5022830903 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5036761815 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5058372949 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5065804976 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5072028836 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5072172924 @default.
• W2920922017 creator A5077572466 @default.
• W2920922017 date "2019-05-01" @default.
• W2920922017 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2920922017 title "Layer-Specific Segmental Longitudinal Strain Measurements: Capability of Detecting Myocardial Scar and Differences in Feasibility, Accuracy, and Reproducibility, Among Four Vendors A Report From the EACVI-ASE Strain Standardization Task Force" @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2002312306 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2003236725 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2064017310 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2070185208 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2080351932 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2094827659 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2100310164 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2135204455 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2149793285 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2190898938 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2328176404 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2474811216 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2547804468 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2564618573 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2587905424 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2591770702 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2593371559 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2606388400 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2608143914 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2614043700 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2623180865 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2623421406 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2725555515 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2743746831 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2751286774 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2768238292 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2774552946 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W2787201390 @default.
• W2920922017 cites W4249896096 @default.
• W2920922017 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2019.01.010" @default.
• W2920922017 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30878251" @default.
• W2920922017 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2920922017 type Work @default.
• W2920922017 sameAs 2920922017 @default.
• W2920922017 citedByCount "19" @default.
• W2920922017 countsByYear W29209220172020 @default.
• W2920922017 countsByYear W29209220172021 @default.
• W2920922017 countsByYear W29209220172022 @default.
• W2920922017 countsByYear W29209220172023 @default.
• W2920922017 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5000581939 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5004312980 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5016878366 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5022830903 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5036761815 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5058372949 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5065804976 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5072028836 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5072172924 @default.
• W2920922017 hasAuthorship W2920922017A5077572466 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C136229726 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C2778022156 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C85378888 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConcept C9893847 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C105795698 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C126322002 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C136229726 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C164705383 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C2778022156 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C33923547 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C71924100 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C85378888 @default.
• W2920922017 hasConceptScore W2920922017C9893847 @default.
• W2920922017 hasFunder F4320308453 @default.
• W2920922017 hasFunder F4320321730 @default.
• W2920922017 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2920922017 hasLocation W29209220171 @default.
• W2920922017 hasLocation W29209220172 @default.
• W2920922017 hasOpenAccess W2920922017 @default.
• W2920922017 hasPrimaryLocation W29209220171 @default.
• W2920922017 hasRelatedWork W193473921 @default.
• W2920922017 hasRelatedWork W2022608139 @default.
• W2920922017 hasRelatedWork W2070185208 @default.
• W2920922017 hasRelatedWork W2078545226 @default.
• W2920922017 hasRelatedWork W2103683515 @default.
• W2920922017 hasRelatedWork W2162132855 @default.
• W2920922017 hasRelatedWork W2170745559 @default.
• W2920922017 hasRelatedWork W2603713988 @default.

• next