Quantitative planar and volumetric cardiac measurements using 64 mdct and 3t mri vs. Standard 2d and m-mode echocardiography: does anesthetic protocol matter?

Cross‐sectional imaging of the heart utilizing computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to be superior for the evaluation of cardiac morphology and systolic function in humans compared to echocardiography. The purpose of this prospective study was to test the effects of two different anesthetic protocols on cardiac measurements in 10 healthy beagle dogs using 64‐multidetector row computed tomographic angiography (64‐MDCTA), 3T magnetic resonance (MRI) and standard awake echocardiography. Both anesthetic protocols used propofol for induction and isoflourane for anesthetic maintenance. In addition, protocol A used midazolam/fentanyl and protocol B used dexmedetomedine as premedication and constant rate infusion during the procedure. Significant elevations in systolic and mean blood pressure were present when using protocol B. There was overall good agreement between the variables of cardiac size and systolic function generated from the MDCTA and MRI exams and no significant difference was found when comparing the variables acquired using either anesthetic protocol within each modality. Systolic function variables generated using 64‐MDCTA and 3T MRI were only able to predict the left ventricular end diastolic volume as measured during awake echocardiogram when using protocol B and 64‐MDCTA. For all other systolic function variables, prediction of awake echocardiographic results was not possible (P = 1). Planar variables acquired using MDCTA or MRI did not allow prediction of the corresponding measurements generated using echocardiography in the awake patients (P = 1). Future studies are needed to validate this approach in a more varied population and clinically affected dogs

Reference ranges ("normal values") for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in adults and children: 2020 update

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) enables assessment and quantification of morphological and functional parameters of the heart, including chamber size and function, diameters of the aorta and pulmonary arteries, flow and myocardial relaxation times. Knowledge of reference ranges ("normal values") for quantitative CMR is crucial to interpretation of results and to distinguish normal from disease. Compared to the previous version of this review published in 2015, we present updated and expanded reference values for morphological and functional CMR parameters of the cardiovascular system based on the peer-reviewed literature and current CMR techniques. Further, databases and references for deep learning methods are included