Back

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance reference ranges for cardiac function and structure and recommendations for grading severity: the Healthy Hearts Consortium

Szabo, L. E.; McCracken, C.; Condurache, D. G.; Bulow, R.; Aquaro, G. D.; Andre, F.; Thu-Thao, L.; Sucha, D.; Salih, A. M.; Roy, R.; Salatzki, J.; Aung, N.; Chadalavada, S.; Lee, A. M.; Harvey, N. C.; Leiner, T.; Chin, C. W. L.; Friedrich, M. G.; Barison, A.; Dorr, M.; Raisi-Estabragh, Z.; Petersen, S. E.

2025-04-08 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2025.04.07.25325351 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionCardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging offers precise quantification of cardiac structure and function. However, its clinical utility is often limited by the absence of robust, standardized reference ranges and severity grading thresholds. AimsThe aim of this study was to establish age-, sex-, and ethnicity-specific reference ranges and severity grading criteria for CMR-derived ventricular and atrial parameters in healthy adults, accounting for variations between two post-processing software tools. Methods and resultsWe analyzed CMR scans from the Healthy Hearts Consortium (HHC), which includes six multi-ethnic international cohorts. Images were automatically segmented using cvi42 (Circle Cardiovascular Imaging) and suiteHEART (Neosoft), with visual and statistical quality control. Ventricular and atrial volumes, myocardial mass, and ejection fractions were derived using short- and long-axis protocols; parameters were indexed to body surface area and height. We defined reference ranges as normal up to the 95% of the prediction interval (PI), and abnormalities as mild up to 99.73%, moderate at 99.73%, and severe at 99.99%, respectively. The final dataset included 4,624 women (51.0%) and 4,435 men (49.0%), with a mean age of 61 {+/-} 13 years (range 18-83), and a multi-ethnic population (81.6% White, 5.6% South Asian, 5.3% Mixed/Other, 3.8% Black, 3.7% Chinese). Minor systematic differences were observed between cvi42 and suiteHEART, particularly in atrial parameters. ConclusionsOur work provides an evidence-based framework for CMR severity grading, offering age-, sex-, and ethnicity-stratified thresholds for mild, moderate, and severe deviations from the reference. These reference values support improved diagnostic accuracy, better risk stratification, and enhanced comparability of CMR findings worldwide. Graphical abstract O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=120 SRC="FIGDIR/small/25325351v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (38K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1fbadc2org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@4ccfdcorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@e2ad16org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1d1bb4d_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG C_FIG Footnote: This graphical abstract summarises the methodology and findings of our study on severity grading using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). It illustrates the dataset, quality control steps, software tools used and the derivation of population-specific reference ranges and severity grading classification. All reference ranges are available on the Healthy Hearts Consortium website (www.healthy-hearts.org.uk). Abbreviations: CMR: cardiovascular magnetic resonance; QC: quality control; EDV: end-diastolic volume; ESV: end-systolic volume; SV: stroke volume; EF: ejection fraction; LV: left ventricle.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
12.3%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 12%
7.1%
3
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
72 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.3%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 32%
4.8%
5
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
6
NMR in Biomedicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
7
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
8
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.3%
9
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
10
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.6%
11
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
12
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
13
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.9%
14
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
15
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
16
Frontiers in Neuroimaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
17
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
18
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
19
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
20
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
21
Analytical Biochemistry
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
22
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
23
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
24
Aperture Neuro
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
25
Photoacoustics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
26
Journal of Internal Medicine
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
27
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
28
Brain Structure and Function
83 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
29
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
43 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
30
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%