Automatic vs semi-automatic global cardiac function assessment using 64-row CT.

OBJECTIVE: Global cardiac function assessment using multidetector CT (MDCT) is time-consuming. Therefore we sought to compare an automatic software tool with an established semi-automatic method. METHODS: A total of 36 patients underwent CT with 64 × 0.5 mm detector collimation, and global left ventricular function was subsequently assessed by two independent blinded readers using both an automatic region-growing-based software tool (with and without manual adjustment) and an established semi-automatic software tool. We also analysed automatic motion mapping to identify end-systole. RESULTS: The time needed for assessment using the semi-automatic approach (12:12 ± 6:19 min) was reduced by 75-85% with the automatic software tool (unadjusted, 01:34 ± 0:29 min, adjusted, 02:53 ± 1:19 min; both p<0.001). There was good correlation (r=0.89; p<0.001) for the ejection fraction (EF) between the adjusted automatic (58.6 ± 14.9%) and the semi-automatic (58.0 ± 15.3%) approaches. Also the manually adjusted automatic approach led to significantly smaller limits of agreement than the unadjusted automatic approach for end-diastolic volume (±36.4 ml vs ±58.5 ml, p>0.05). Using motion mapping to automatically identify end-systole reduced analysis time by 95% compared with the semi-automatic approach, but showed inferior precision for EF and end-systolic volume. CONCLUSION: Automatic function assessment using MDCT with manual adjustment shows good agreement with an established semi-automatic approach, while reducing the analysis by 75% to less than 3 min. This suggests that automatic CT function assessment with manual correction may be used for fast, comfortable and reliable evaluation of global left ventricular function.

Improvement of skills and knowledge by a hands-on cardiac CT course: before and after evaluation with a validated questionnaire and self-assessment.

PURPOSE: Cardiac computed tomography (CT) is becoming increasingly important in noninvasive imaging. To meet this demand, there are a growing number of short training courses for cardiac CT. Whether such courses improve the knowledge and skills of participants is not known. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The concept of a two-day cardiac CT course consisting of introductory lectures, live patient examinations, and hands-on exercises for interpreting cardiac CT scans on workstations was analyzed using participant evaluations (scales from 1=excellent to 6=very poor). Participants rated their increase in knowledge and completed a validated questionnaire with 20 questions. RESULTS: A total of 102 participants attended the courses. There were significant differences in the number of correctly answered test questions between cardiac CT experts and participants at the beginning of the course (91.5+/-6.3 % vs. 62.4+/-16.1% p<0.001). The number of questions answered correctly by the participants increased significantly after completion of the course (mean increase of 4 correctly answered questions, 81.8+/-11.4%. vs. 62.4+/-16.1% p<0.001). This objective increase in knowledge was in good agreement with participant self-assessments (76.4+/-12.6% vs. 81.8+/-11.4%). The quality of the course received good to very good scores, ranging from 1.8+/-0.7 for speed of presentation to 1.4+/-0.5 for lecturer competence. The score for overall course quality was 1.4+/-0.6. CONCLUSION: A relatively short cardiac CT course can significantly improve the quantifiable knowledge of participants. The overall quality of the course was rated as very good.