Contribution of Ventricular Motion and Sampling Location to Discrepancies in Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Fetal Ventricular Strain Measures

Highlights

• There are unexplained discrepancies in 2D versus 3D fetal echo strain measurements.

• We studied clinical images and validated with computational modeling.

• Discrepancies are due to specific out-of-plane motion errors in 2D strains.

• Discrepancies are further due to an uncertainty in 3D zero-stain reference time point.

• The location of measurement can also cause large variability in strains.

Background

Echocardiographic quantification of fetal cardiac strain is important to evaluate function and the need for intervention, with both two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) strain measurements currently feasible. However, discrepancies between 2D and 3D measurements have been reported, the etiologies of which are unclear. This study sought to determine the etiologies of the differences between 2D and 3D strain measurements.

Methods

A validated cardiac motion-tracking algorithm was used on 3D cine ultrasound images acquired in 26 healthy fetuses. Both 2D and 3D myocardial strain quantifications were performed on each image set for controlled comparisons. Finite element modeling of 2 left ventricle (LV) models with minor geometrical differences were performed with various helix angle configurations for validating image processing results.

Results

Three-dimensional longitudinal strain (LS) was significantly lower than 2D LS for the LV free wall and septum but not for the right ventricular (RV) free wall, while 3D circumferential strain (CS) was significantly higher than 2D CS for the LV, RV, and septum. The LS discrepancy was due to 2D long-axis imaging not capturing the out-of-plane motions associated with LV twist, while the CS discrepancy was due to the systolic motion of the heart toward the apex that caused out-of-plane motions in 2D short-axis imaging. A timing mismatch between the occurrences of peak longitudinal and circumferential dimensions caused a deviation in zero-strain referencing between 2D and 3D strain measurements, contributing to further discrepancies between the 2.

Conclusions

Mechanisms for discrepancies between 2D and 3D strain measurements in fetal echocardiography were identified, and inaccuracies associated with 2D strains were highlighted. Understanding of this mechanism is useful and important for future standardization of fetal cardiac strain measurements, which we propose to be important in view of large discrepancies in measured values in the literature.