In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.

The free consultation period for this content is over.

It is now only available year-round to EACVI Silver Members, Fellows of the ESC and Young combined Members

Segmental left ventricular strain measurements using cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking - reproducibility and accuracy among four vendors

Session Poster session 1

Speaker Monica Dobrovie

Congress : EuroCMR 2019

  • Topic : imaging
  • Sub-topic : Cardiac Magnetic Resonance: Deformation Imaging
  • Session type : Poster Session
  • FP Number : P162

Authors : M Dobrovie (Leuven,BE), M Barreiro-Perez (Leuven,BE), D Curione (Leuven,BE), R Symons (Leuven,BE), P Claus (Leuven,BE), JU Voigt (Leuven,BE), J Bogaert (Leuven,BE)

M Dobrovie1 , M Barreiro-Perez1 , D Curione1 , R Symons1 , P Claus2 , JU Voigt2 , J Bogaert1 , 1KU Leuven, Department of Imaging and Pathology - Leuven - Belgium , 2KU Leuven, Department of Cardiovascular Sciences - Leuven - Belgium ,

European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging ( 2019 ) 20 ( Supplement 2 ), ii119


Myocardial strain measurements using magnetic resonance feature tracking proves to be a new promising tool for cardiac function assessment, but only a few studies address intervendor consistency, especially for segmental strain.


Our aim was to evaluate segmental strain measurement reproducibility and accuracy among 4 different software.


We selected 45 patients, appointed to 3 groups: 15 normal, 15 with dilated cardiomyopathy and 15 with acute infarction and performed measurements of longitudinal, circumferential and radial strain employing software from Medviso, Circle, TomTec and Medis. Reproducibility between strain values obtained with the 4 different vendors was assessed by comparing software among each other as well as with the mean of all of them. Furthermore intra- and inter-observer variability was assessed with interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV). Finally, the accuracy of strain measurement for detection of structural (infarcted segments) as well as functional pathology (septal vs. lateral wall strain in left bundle branch block (LBBB)) was assessed.


There was significant intervendor difference in segmental strain for longitudinal, circumferential and radial strain (all three p < 0.001). Medviso demonstrated the best intra- as well as inter-observer variability with ICC > 0.962 and CV <24%, followed by Medis and TomTec with ICC > 0.812 and CV < 54%. Circle displayed acceptable ICC (0.715) but high coefficient of variability (109%). There was significant difference between vendors also in the discrimination of infarcted segments, or septum dysfunction in LBBB patients. In this case Circle displayed the highest difference btw pathologic and normal segments, with best performance for longitudinal strain measurements.


Intervendor differences for segmental strain measurements are significant rendering some software approaches more reproducible than others and stressing the need for further standardization.

Based on your interests

Members get more

Join now
  • 1ESC Professional Members – access all resources from ESC Congress and ESC Asia with APSC & AFC
  • 2ESC Association Members (Ivory, Silver, Gold) – access your Association’s congress resources
  • 3Under 40 or in training - with a Combined Membership, access resources from all congresses
Join now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are