Assessment of left ventricular function and mass in dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography. Influence of beta-blockers on left ventricular function: Comparison to magnetic resonance imaging

Purpose: To quantify left ventricular (LV) function and mass (LVM) derived from dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) and the influence of beta-blocker administration compared to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). Methods: Thirty-two patients undergoing cardiac DSCT and CMR were included, where of fifteen received metoprolol intravenously before DSCT. LV parameters were calculated by the disc-summation method (DSM) and by a segmented region-growing algorithm (RGA). All data sets were analyzed by two blinded observers. Interobserver agreement was tested by the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results.: 1. Using DSM LV parameters were not statistically different between DSCT and CMR in all patients (DSCT vs. CMR: EF 63 ± 8% vs. 64 ± 8%, p = 0.47; EDV 136 ± 36 ml vs. 138 ± 35 ml, p = 0.66; ESV 52 ± 21 ml vs. 52 ± 22 ml, p = 0.61; SV 83 ± 22 ml vs. 87 ± 19 ml, p = 0.22; CO 5.4 ± 0.9 l/min vs. 5.7 ± 1.2 l/min, p = 0.09, LVM 132 ± 33 g vs. 132 ± 33 g, p = 0.99). 2. In a subgroup of 15 patients beta-blockade prior to DSCT resulted in a lower ejection fraction (EF), stroke volume (SV), cardiac output (CO) and increase in end systolic volume (ESV) in DSCT (EF 59 ± 8% vs. 62 ± 9%; SV 73 ± 17 ml vs. 81 ± 15 ml; CO 5.7 ± 1.2 l/min vs. 5.0 ± 0.8 l/min; ESV 52 ± 27 ml vs. 57 ± 24 ml, all p < 0.05). 3. Analyzing the RGA parameters LV volumes were not significantly different compared to DSM, whereas LVM was higher using RGA (177 ± 31 g vs. 132 ± 33 g, p < 0.05). Interobserver agreement was excellent comparing DSM values with best agreement between RGA calculations. Conclusion: Left ventricular volumes and mass can reliably be assessed by DSCT compared to CMR. However, beta-blocker administration leads to statistically significant reduced EF, SV and CO, whereas ESV significantly increases. DSCT RGA reliably analyzes LV function, whereas LVM is overestimated compared to DSM.