Skip to main content
. 2024 Nov 8;4(4):284–299. doi: 10.1097/CD9.0000000000000141

Table 3.

Comparison of reference global strain values by CMR techniques. [46,47,48]

CMR technique LVGLS LVGCS LVGRS RVGLS LAtotal RAtotal
CMR tagging −14.6 (−16.2 to −12.9) −19.9 (−21.1 to −17.7) 16.2 (11.2–21.2) ND ND ND
DENSE ND −19.0 (−19.7 to −18.3) 24.3 (16.2–32.2) ND ND ND
SENC −20.0 (−22.5 to −17.4) −20.9 (−22.4 to −19.3) ND −18.7 (−19.5 to −17.9) ND ND
FT-CMR −18.4 (−19.2 to −17.6) −21.4 (−22.3 to −20.6) 43.7 (40–47.4) −24.0 (−25.8 to −22.1) 34.9 (29.6–40.2) 36.3 (15.5–57.0)

Data are presented as mean (95% confidence interval). CMR: Cardiac magnetic resonance; DENSE: Displacement encoding with stimulated echoes; FT-CMR: Feature-tracking CMR; GCS: Global circumferential strain; GLS: Global longitudinal strain; GRS: Global radial strain; LA: Left atrium; LV: Left ventricle; ND: No data; RA: Right atrium; RV: Right ventricle; SENC: Strain-encoded imaging.