Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 May;37(5):1689-1697.
doi: 10.1007/s10554-020-02155-2. Epub 2021 Jan 16.

Inter-vendor variability in strain measurements depends on software rather than image characteristics

Serkan Ünlü  1   2 , Oana Mirea  1   3 , Stéphanie Bézy  1 , Jürgen Duchenne  1 , Efstathios D Pagourelias  1   4 , Jan Bogaert  5 , James D Thomas  6 , Luigi P Badano  7 , Jens-Uwe Voigt  8 ; EACVI-ASE-Industry Standardization Task Force, chaired by; participating companies
Collaborators, Affiliations

Inter-vendor variability in strain measurements depends on software rather than image characteristics

Serkan Ünlü et al. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021 May.

Abstract

Despite standardization efforts, vendors still use specific proprietary software algorithms for echocardiographic strain measurements, which result in high inter-vendor variability. Using vendor-independent software could be one solution. Little is known, however, how vendor specific image characteristics can influence tracking results of such software. We therefore investigated the reproducibility, accuracy, and scar detection ability of strain measurements on images from different vendors by using a vendor-independent software. A vendor-independent software (TomTec Image Arena) was used to analyse datasets of 63 patients which were obtained on machines from four different ultrasound machine vendors (GE, Philips, Siemens, Toshiba). We measured the tracking feasibility, inter-vendor bias, the relative test-re-test variability and scar discrimination ability of strain measurements. Cardiac magnetic resonance delayed enhancement images were used as the reference standard of scar definition. Tracking feasibility on vendor datasets were significantly different (p < 0.001). Variability of global longitudinal strain (GLS) measurements was similar among the vendors whereas variability of segmental longitudinal strain (SLS) showed modest difference. Relative test-re-test variability of GLS and SLS showed no relevant differences. No significant difference in scar detection capability was observed. Average GLS and SLS values were similar among vendors. Reproducibility of GLS measurements showed no difference among vendors and was in acceptable range. SLS reproducibility was high but similar for all vendors. No relevant difference was found for identifying regional dysfunction. Tracking feasibility showed a substantial difference among images from different vendors. Our findings demonstrate that tracking results depend mainly on the software used and show little influence from vendor specific image characteristics.

Keywords: Independent; Reproducibility; Strain; Variability; Vendor.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Editor's Note.
    Reiber JHC. Reiber JHC. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021 May;37(5):1489-1490. doi: 10.1007/s10554-021-02242-y. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021. PMID: 33864563 No abstract available.

References

    1. Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V et al (2015) Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 16:233–271. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jev014 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Galderisi M, Cosyns B, Edvardsen T et al (2017) Standardization of adult transthoracic echocardiography reporting in agreement with recent chamber quantification, diastolic function, and heart valve disease recommendations: an expert consensus document of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imag. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 18:1301–1310. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jex244 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Farsalinos KE, Daraban AM, Ünlü S et al (2015) Head-to-Head Comparison of Global Longitudinal Strain Measurements among Nine Different Vendors The EACVI/ASE Inter-Vendor Comparison Study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 28:1171-1181.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2015.06.011 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mirea O, Pagourelias ED, Duchenne J et al (2018) Variability and Reproducibility of Segmental Longitudinal Strain Measurements: A Report from the EACVI-ASE Strain Standardization Task Force. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 11:15–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.01.027 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ünlü S, Mirea O, Pagourelias ED et al (2019) 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. J Am Soc Echocardiogr Off Publ Am Soc Echocardiogr 32:624-632.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2019.01.010 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources