English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Ultrasound Myocardial Elastography (UME) and Tagged Magnetic Resonance Imaging (tMRI) are two imaging modalities that were developed in the recent years to quantitatively estimate the myocardial deformations. Tagged MRI is currently considered as the gold standard for myocardial strain mapping in vivo. However, despite the low SNR nature of ultrasound signals, echocardiography enjoys the widespread availability in the clinic, as well as its low cost and high temporal resolution. Comparing the strain estimation performances of the two techniques has been of great interests to the community. In order to assess the cardiac deformation across different imaging modalities, in this paper, we developed a semi-automatic intensity and gradient based registration framework that rigidly registers the 3D tagged MRIs with the 2D ultrasound images. Based on the two registered modalities, we conducted spatially and temporally more detailed quantitative strain comparison of the RF-based UME technique and tagged MRI. From the experimental results, we conclude that qualitatively the two modalities share similar overall trends. But error and variations in UME accumulate over time. Quantitatively tMRI is more robust and accurate than UME.

Ultrasound Myocardial Elastography and Registered 3D Tagged MRI: Quantitative Strain Comparison