Continuous measurement of aortic dimensions in Turner syndrome: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance study

Dhananjay Radhakrishnan Subramaniam, William A Stoddard, Kristian H Mortensen, Steffen Ringgaard, Christian Trolle, Claus H Gravholt, Ephraim J Gutmark, Goutham Mylavarapu, Philippe F Backeljauw, Iris Gutmark-Little, Dhananjay Radhakrishnan Subramaniam, William A Stoddard, Kristian H Mortensen, Steffen Ringgaard, Christian Trolle, Claus H Gravholt, Ephraim J Gutmark, Goutham Mylavarapu, Philippe F Backeljauw, Iris Gutmark-Little

Abstract

Background: Severity of thoracic aortic disease in Turner syndrome (TS) patients is currently described through measures of aorta size and geometry at discrete locations. The objective of this study is to develop an improved measurement tool that quantifies changes in size and geometry over time, continuously along the length of the thoracic aorta.

Methods: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) scans for 15 TS patients [41 ± 9 years (mean age ± standard deviation (SD))] were acquired over a 10-year period and compared with ten healthy gender and age-matched controls. Three-dimensional aortic geometries were reconstructed, smoothed and clipped, which was followed by identification of centerlines and planes normal to the centerlines. Geometric variables, including maximum diameter and cross-sectional area, were evaluated continuously along the thoracic aorta. Distance maps were computed for TS and compared to the corresponding maps for controls, to highlight any asymmetry and dimensional differences between diseased and normal aortae. Furthermore, a registration scheme was proposed to estimate localized changes in aorta geometry between visits. The estimated maximum diameter from the continuous method was then compared with corresponding manual measurements at 7 discrete locations for each visit and for changes between visits.

Results: Manual measures at the seven positions and the corresponding continuous measurements of maximum diameter for all visits considered, correlated highly (R-value = 0.77, P < 0.01). There was good agreement between manual and continuous measurement methods for visit-to-visit changes in maximum diameter. The continuous method was less sensitive to inter-user variability [0.2 ± 2.3 mm (mean difference in diameters ± SD)] and choice of smoothing software [0.3 ± 1.3 mm]. Aortic diameters were larger in TS than controls in the ascending [TS: 13.4 ± 2.1 mm (mean distance ± SD), Controls: 12.6 ± 1 mm] and descending [TS: 10.2 ± 1.3 mm (mean distance ± SD), Controls: 9.5 ± 0.9 mm] thoracic aorta as observed from the distance maps.

Conclusions: An automated methodology is presented that enables rapid and precise three-dimensional measurement of thoracic aortic geometry, which can serve as an improved tool to define disease severity and monitor disease progression.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier - NCT01678274 . Registered - 08.30.2012.

Keywords: Aorta; Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Centerlines; Continuous measures; Euclidean distance; Iterative closest point; Maximum diameter; Turner syndrome.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Procedure to generate 3D patient-specific geometries of the thoracic aorta, exemplied for a subject with Turner sydrome (Subject 6). The CMR images were segmented to identify a rough geometry which is subsequently smoothed and clipped for analysis. Centerlines were then identified using VMTK (highlighted in black, overlayed on corresponding aorta geometry) and planes could be sampled normal to the centerline (highlighted in yellow, centerline also shown for reference)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Visit based variation in maximum aortic diameter for three aortic phenotypes in TS comprised of aortic valve regurgitation (Subject 1), elongation of the transverse aortic arch (Subject 9) and aortic coarctation (Subject 7). Visit 1 – solid blue line, Visit 2 – solid red line, Visit 3 – solid black line. Diamond markers indicate corresponding manual measures. Data at locations of the inominate artery (IA), left common carotid artery (LCCA), left subclavian artery (LSCA) (shaded in black) excluded from analysis. All values are in mm. Aortas for the three visits aligned at the branches
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Visit based variation in cross-sectional area for three aortic phenotypes in TS comprised of aortic valve regurgitation (Subject 1), elongation of the transverse aortic arch (Subject 9) and aortic coarctation (Subject7). Visit 1 – solid blue line, Visit 2 – solid red line, Visit 3 – solid black line. Diamond markers indicate corresponding manual measures. Data at locations of the inominate artery (IA), left common carotid artery (LCCA), left subclavian artery (LSCA) (shaded in black) excluded from analysis. All values are in mm2. Aortas for the three visits aligned at the branches
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Scatter plot and linear regression lines for maximum diameter at select locations along the thoracic aorta for all cases and visits. Visit 1 - blue diamond markers and solid line, Visit 2 - red diamond markers and solid line, Visit 3 - black diamond markers and solid line. Forty-five degrees dashed green line also shown to indicate deviation of manual measures relative to the corresponding continuous values
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Bland-Altman analysis comparing maximum aortic diameter obtained using manual and continuous methods for individual visits and all visits considered. Visit 1 - blue diamond markers, solid blue line – mean, light blue lines - ±1.96SD, Visit 2 – red diamond markers, solid red line – mean, light red lines - ±1.96SD, Visit 3, All Visits - black diamond markers, solid black line – mean, gray lines - ±1.96SD
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Passing-Bablok regression plots comparing manual and continuous methods for individual visits and all visits considered. Visit 1 - blue diamond markers, solid blue line – regression line, light blue dashed lines – upper and lower bounds, Visit 2 – red diamond markers, solid red line – regression line, light red lines – upper and lower bounds, Visit 3, All Visits - black diamond markers, solid black line – regression line, gray lines – upper and lower bounds
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Color plots indicating circumferential and axial variation in Euclidean distance from centerlines for controls included in this study. All dimensions are in mm. Anterior and posterior views of the aorta are shown for each case
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Color plots indicating circumferential and axial variation in Euclidean distance from centerlines for 10 TS patients (patient nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 and 15). All dimensions are in mm. Anterior and posterior views of the aorta are shown for each subject
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Three dimensional visit-to-visit variation in aorta geometry (Subject 9). a Color plots indicating circumferential and axial variation in Euclidean distance from centerlines. All dimensions are in mm. Anterior and posterior views of the aorta are shown for each visit. b Color plots indicating circumferential and axial variation in visit-by-visit change, obtained using point registration. Positive indicates increasing and negative indicates decreasing dimension of Visit 2 / Visit 3 relative to Visit 1 / Visit 2. Reference aortic surface (Visit 1 or 2) and registered aorta (Visit 2 or 3) are shown in blue and white, respectively. All values in mm. Anterior views shown for the three cases. Arrows shown to indicate location of progressive coarctation
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
Sensitivity of continuous measurements to choice of segmentation software and smoothing algorithm, exemplified for a subject with Turner syndrome (Subject 6). a Software 1 (solid blue line) – Mimics, Software 2 (solid red line) – ITK-Snap, Software 3 (solid black line) – 3D Slicer. b Smoothing Algorithm 1 (solid blue line) – C0 Smoothing, Smoothing Algorithm 2 (solid red line) – C1 Smoothing, Smoothing Algorithm 3 (solid black line) – Simple Smoothing. Aorta geometries were smoothed using OpenFlipper
Fig. 11
Fig. 11
Sensitivity of continuous measurements to choice of smoothing software and user, exemplified for a patient with Turner syndrome (Subject 6). a Segmentation of aorta performed using Mimics. Smoothing Software 1 (solid blue line) – Mimics, Smoothing Software 2 (solid red line) – OpenFlipper. bSolid blue line – User 1, Solid red line – User 2

References

    1. van den Berg J, Bannink EM, Wielopolski PA, Pattynama PM, de Muinck Keizer-Schrama SM, Helbing WA. Aortic distensibility and dimensions and the effects of growth hormone treatment in the turner syndrome. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97(11):1644–9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.12.058.
    1. Mortensen KH, Andersen NH, Gravholt CH. Cardiovascular phenotype in Turner syndrome--integrating cardiology, genetics, and endocrinology. Endocr Rev. 2012;33(5):677–714. doi: 10.1210/er.2011-1059.
    1. Matura LA, Ho VB, Rosing DR, Bondy CA. Aortic dilatation and dissection in turner syndrome. Circulation. 2007;116(15):1663–70. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.685487.
    1. Gutmark-Little I, Backeljauw PF. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in Turner syndrome. Clin Endocrinol. 2013;78(5):646–58. doi: 10.1111/cen.12157.
    1. Mortensen KH, Erlandsen M, Andersen NH, Gravholt CH. Prediction of aortic dilation in Turner syndrome - enhancing the use of serial cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013;15(1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-15-47.
    1. Cleemann L, Mortensen K, Holm K, Smedegaard H, Skouby S, Wieslander S, et al. Aortic dimensions in girls and young women with turner syndrome: a magnetic resonance imaging study. Pediatr Cardiol. 2010;31(4):497–504. doi: 10.1007/s00246-009-9626-8.
    1. Hjerrild B, Mortensen K, Sorensen K, Pedersen E, Andersen N, Lundorf E, et al. Thoracic aortopathy in Turner syndrome and the influence of bicuspid aortic valves and blood pressure: a CMR study. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010;12(1):12. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-12-12.
    1. Mortensen K, Hjerrild B, Stochholm K, Andersen N, Sorensen K, Lundorf E, et al. Dilation of the ascending aorta in Turner syndrome - a prospective cardiovascular magnetic resonance study. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2011;13(1):24. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-13-24.
    1. Erbel R, Aboyans V, Boileau C, Bossone E, Bartolomeo RD, Eggebrecht H, et al. 2014 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases. Eur Heart J. 2014;35(41):2873–926. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu281.
    1. Hiratzka LF, Bakris GL, Beckman JA, Bersin RM, Carr VF, Casey DE, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Thoracic Aortic Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American College of Radiology, American Stroke Association, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and Society for Vascular Medicine. Circulation. 2010;121(13):e266–369. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e3181d4739e.
    1. Bersvendsen J, Beitnes JO, Urheim S, Aakhus S, Samset E. Automatic measurement of aortic annulus diameter in 3-dimensional Transoesophageal echocardiography. BMC Med Imaging. 2014;14(1):1–8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2342-14-31.
    1. Ntsinjana H, Biglino G, Capelli C, Tann O, Giardini A, Derrick G, et al. Aortic arch shape is not associated with hypertensive response to exercise in patients with repaired congenital heart diseases. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013;15(1):101. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-15-101.
    1. Bruse JL, McLeod K, Biglino G, Ntsinjana HN, Capelli C, Hsia T-Y, et al. A statistical shape modelling framework to extract 3D shape biomarkers from medical imaging data: assessing arch morphology of repaired coarctation of the aorta. BMC Med Imaging. 2016;16(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12880-016-0142-z.
    1. Bruse JL, Khushnood A, McLeod K, Biglino G, Sermesant M, Pennec X, et al. How successful is successful? Aortic arch shape after successful aortic coarctation repair correlates with left ventricular function. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;153(2):418.
    1. Bruse JL, Cervi E, McLeod K, Biglino G, Sermesant M, Pennec X, et al. Looks do matter! Aortic arch shape after hypoplastic left heart syndrome palliation correlates with cavopulmonary outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017;103(2):645.
    1. Arzani A, Suh G-Y, Dalman RL, Shadden SC. A longitudinal comparison of hemodynamics and intraluminal thrombus deposition in abdominal aortic aneurysms. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2014;307(12):H1786–95. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00461.2014.
    1. Mortensen KH, Hjerrild BE, Andersen NH, Sørensen KE, Hørlyck A, Pedersen EM, et al. Abnormalities of the major intrathoracic arteries in Turner syndrome as revealed by magnetic resonance imaging. Cardiol Young. 2010;20(02):191–200. doi: 10.1017/S1047951110000041.
    1. Sybert VP, McCauley E. Turner’s syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(12):1227–38. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra030360.
    1. Antiga L, Piccinelli M, Botti L, Ene-Iordache B, Remuzzi A, Steinman D. An image-based modeling framework for patient-specific computational hemodynamics. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2008;46(11):1097–112. doi: 10.1007/s11517-008-0420-1.
    1. Yap CH, Liu X, Pekkan K. Characterizaton of the vessel geometry, flow mechanics and wall shear stress in the great arteries of wildtype prenatal mouse. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e86878. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086878.
    1. Piccinelli M, Veneziani A, Steinman DA, Remuzzi A, Antiga L. A framework for geometric analysis of vascular structures: application to cerebral aneurysms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2009;28(8):1141–55. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2009.2021652.
    1. Besl PJ, McKay ND. A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 1992;14(2):239–56. doi: 10.1109/34.121791.
    1. Auricchio F, Conti M, Ferrazzano C, Sgueglia GA. A simple framework to generate 3D patient-specific model of coronary artery bifurcation from single-plane angiographic images. Comput Biol Med. 2014;44:97–109. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2013.10.027.
    1. Rosero EB, Peshock RM, Khera A, Clagett GP, Lo H, Timaran C. Agreement between methods of measurement of mean aortic wall thickness by MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;29(3):576–82. doi: 10.1002/jmri.21697.
    1. Passing H, Bablok A new biometrical procedure for testing the equality of measurements from two different analytical methods. Application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in clinical chemistry, Part I. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem. 1983;21(11):709–20.
    1. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods. 7th ed. Iowa: Iowa State University Press; 1980.
    1. Warfield SK, Zou KH, Wells WM. Simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE): an algorithm for the validation of image segmentation. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2004;23(7):903–21. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2004.828354.
    1. Wissmann L, Santelli C, Segars WP, Kozerke S. MRXCAT: Realistic numerical phantoms for cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2014;16(1):63. doi: 10.1186/s12968-014-0063-3.
    1. van Ooij P, Garcia J, Potters WV, Malaisrie SC, Collins JD, Carr JC, et al. Age-related changes in aortic 3D blood flow velocities and wall shear stress: implications for the identification of altered hemodynamics in patients with aortic valve disease. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015:n/a-n/a. doi:10.1002/jmri.25081.
    1. Roccabianca S, Figueroa CA, Tellides G, Humphrey JD. Quantification of regional differences in aortic stiffness in the aging human. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014;29:618–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.01.026.
    1. Isselbacher EM. Thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms. Circulation. 2005;111(6):816–28. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000154569.08857.7A.
    1. Lin AE, Lippe B, Rosenfeld RG. Further delineation of aortic dilation, dissection, and rupture in patients with turner syndrome. Pediatrics. 1998;102(1):e12-e. doi: 10.1542/peds.102.1.e12.
    1. Fazel SS, Mallidi HR, Lee RS, Sheehan MP, Liang D, Fleischman D, et al. The aortopathy of bicuspid aortic valve disease has distinctive patterns and usually involves the transverse aortic arch. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;135(4):901–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.01.022.
    1. Chen J, Gutmark E, Mylavarapu G, Backeljauw PF, Gutmark-Little I. Numerical investigation of mass transport through patient-specific deformed aortae. J Biomech. 2014;47(2):544–52. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.10.031.
    1. Prahl Wittberg L, van Wyk S, Fuchs L, Gutmark E, Backeljauw P, Gutmark-Little I. Effects of aortic irregularities on blood flow. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2015:1-16. doi:10.1007/s10237-015-0692-y.
    1. Kilner PJ, Yang GZ, Mohiaddin RH, Firmin DN, Longmore DB. Helical and retrograde secondary flow patterns in the aortic arch studied by three-directional magnetic resonance velocity mapping. Circulation. 1993;88(5):2235–47. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.88.5.2235.
    1. Liu X, Fan Y, Deng X. Effect of spiral flow on the transport of oxygen in the aorta: a numerical study. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010;38(3):917–26. doi: 10.1007/s10439-009-9878-8.
    1. Georgakarakos E, Ioannou CV, Kamarianakis Y, Papaharilaou Y, Kostas T, Manousaki E, et al. The role of geometric parameters in the prediction of abdominal aortic aneurysm wall stress. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010;39(1):42–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2009.09.026.
    1. Humphrey JD, Holzapfel GA. Mechanics, mechanobiology, and modeling of human abdominal aorta and aneurysms. J Biomech. 2012;45(5):805–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.11.021.
    1. Valentín A, Cardamone L, Baek S, Humphrey JD. Complementary vasoactivity and matrix remodelling in arterial adaptations to altered flow and pressure. J R Soc Interface. 2009;6(32):293–306. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2008.0254.
    1. Valentín A, Humphrey JD. Evaluation of fundamental hypotheses underlying constrained mixture models of arterial growth and remodelling. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2009;367(1902):3585–606. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2009.0113.
    1. El Khoury G, Vanoverschelde J-L, Glineur D, Pierard F, Verhelst RR, Rubay J, et al. Repair of Bicuspid aortic valves in patients with aortic regurgitation. Circulation. 2006;114(1 suppl):I-610-I-6.
    1. Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC, Smith RG, Ho S, Gee JC, et al. User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: Significantly improved efficiency and reliability. NeuroImage. 2006;31(3):1116–28. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015.
    1. Möbius J, Kobbelt L, et al. OpenFlipper: an open source geometry processing and rendering framework. In: Boissonnat J-D, Chenin P, Cohen A, Gout C, Lyche T, Mazure M-L, et al., editors. Curves and surfaces: 7th International Conference, Avignon, France, June 24 - 30, 2010, Revised Selected Papers. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2012. pp. 488–500.
    1. Sorkine O, Cohen-Or D, Lipman Y, Alexa M, Rössl C, Seidel H-P. Laplacian surface editing. Proceedings of the 2004 Eurographics/ACM SIGGRAPH symposium on Geometry processing. Nice: ACM; 2004. p. 175–84.
    1. Barsky BA, DeRose TD. Geometric continuity of parametric curves: three equivalent characterizations. IEEE Comput Graph Appl. 1989;9(6):60–9. doi: 10.1109/38.41470.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit