Quantitative Assessment of Left Ventricular Function Using Cardiac Phase-Contrast and Cine Magnetic Resonance Imaging Comparison with Pressure-Volume Loops Analysis: In Vivo Validation on a Swine Model

[2] Mostbeck, GH et al, J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993,17:245-52 [3] Sagawa, K et al, Circulation 1981, 63:1223-1227 [4] Marsh, JD et al, Am J Cardiol. 1979, 44:1311-1317 Figure 2. Bland-Altman analysis of agreement for CO correlations (a) PC-MRI vs. P-V loops, (b) MRI cine vs. P-V loops. The difference is plotted as a function of the average of the result from two methods. The lines in the graphs indicate the upper and lower limits of agreement, mean ± 2 SD. Figure 1. Sample plot of LV P-V loops of two out of eight pigs with normal (a) and impaired heart conditions (b). The slops of end-diastolic pressure volume relation (EDPVR) and end-systolic pressure volume relation (ESPVR) were determined. Figures c and d show the corresponding MR images at end-systole and end-diastole from the same subjects, respectively. The corresponding MR images from the same subject (as shown P-V loops in figure b) were displayed in Figures e and f. Quantitative Assessment of Left Ventricular Function Using Cardiac Phase-Contrast and Cine Magnetic Resonance Imaging Comparison with Pressure-Volume Loops Analysis: In Vivo Validation on a Swine Model