BACKGROUND: Because there are few data available on the accuracy of 2D-echocardiography to assess right ventricular (RV) size and function in patients with far-advanced lung disease, in this prospective study, we compared various echocardiographic RV parameters with RV volumes derived from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: In 32 patients (18 male, 17 female) presenting for lung transplantation, we measured RV end-diastolic and end-systolic area as well as derived RV fractional area change, long-axis diameter, short-axis diameter, tricuspid valve anulus diameter (using 2D apical or sub-costal 4-chamber view), and RV end-diastolic diameter (using M-mode in the parasternal short-axis view). These values were compared with RV end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes derived by MRI, serving as the gold standard. RESULTS: Right ventricular end-diastolic area was the most accurate echocardiographic parameter of RV size (correlation to MRI: r = 0.88, p < 0.001), followed by RV end-diastolic short-axis diameter (r = 0.75, p < 0.001), long axis diameter (r = 0.66, p < 0.001), and tricuspid valve anulus diameter (r = 0.63, p < 0.001). In contrast, M-mode measurement of RV end-diastolic diameter was possible in only 24/35 (68%) patients and showed a weak correlation to MRI-derived RV end-diastolic volume (r = 0.56, p = 0.004). Right ventricular fractional area change correlated well with MRI-derived RV ejection fraction (r = 0.84, p < 0.0001). In a sub-group analysis, patients with vascular lung disease showed best agreement between both methods for RV end-diastolic area and RV fractional area change compared with patients with restrictive or obstructive lung disease. CONCLUSION: This study shows that in patients with far-advanced lung diseases, RV end-diastolic area demonstrated the best correlation with MRI-derived measurement of RV end-diastolic volume, and RV fractional area change compared favorably with MRI-derived ejection fraction. Despite reduced image quality, especially in patients with obstructive lung disease, these parameters can yield clinically valuable information.
BACKGROUND: Because there are few data available on the accuracy of 2D-echocardiography to assess right ventricular (RV) size and function in patients with far-advanced lung disease, in this prospective study, we compared various echocardiographic RV parameters with RV volumes derived from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: In 32 patients (18 male, 17 female) presenting for lung transplantation, we measured RV end-diastolic and end-systolic area as well as derived RV fractional area change, long-axis diameter, short-axis diameter, tricuspid valve anulus diameter (using 2D apical or sub-costal 4-chamber view), and RV end-diastolic diameter (using M-mode in the parasternal short-axis view). These values were compared with RV end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes derived by MRI, serving as the gold standard. RESULTS: Right ventricular end-diastolic area was the most accurate echocardiographic parameter of RV size (correlation to MRI: r = 0.88, p < 0.001), followed by RV end-diastolic short-axis diameter (r = 0.75, p < 0.001), long axis diameter (r = 0.66, p < 0.001), and tricuspid valve anulus diameter (r = 0.63, p < 0.001). In contrast, M-mode measurement of RV end-diastolic diameter was possible in only 24/35 (68%) patients and showed a weak correlation to MRI-derived RV end-diastolic volume (r = 0.56, p = 0.004). Right ventricular fractional area change correlated well with MRI-derived RV ejection fraction (r = 0.84, p < 0.0001). In a sub-group analysis, patients with vascular lung disease showed best agreement between both methods for RV end-diastolic area and RV fractional area change compared with patients with restrictive or obstructive lung disease. CONCLUSION: This study shows that in patients with far-advanced lung diseases, RV end-diastolic area demonstrated the best correlation with MRI-derived measurement of RV end-diastolic volume, and RV fractional area change compared favorably with MRI-derived ejection fraction. Despite reduced image quality, especially in patients with obstructive lung disease, these parameters can yield clinically valuable information.
Authors: G B Bleeker; P Steendijk; E R Holman; C-M Yu; O A Breithardt; T A M Kaandorp; M J Schalij; E E van der Wall; P Nihoyannopoulos; J J Bax Journal: Heart Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Wyman W Lai; Kimberlee Gauvreau; Ernesto S Rivera; Susan Saleeb; Andrew J Powell; Tal Geva Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2008-04-28 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Marc A Simon; Christopher Deible; Michael A Mathier; Joan Lacomis; Orly Goitein; Sanjeev G Shroff; Michael R Pinsky Journal: Clin Transl Sci Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 4.689
Authors: Philip T Levy; Brittney Dioneda; Mark R Holland; Timothy J Sekarski; Caroline K Lee; Amit Mathur; W Todd Cade; Alison G Cahill; Aaron Hamvas; Gautam K Singh Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2015-03-07 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Marc A Simon; Navin Rajagopalan; Michael A Mathier; Sanjeev G Shroff; Michael R Pinsky; Angel López-Candales Journal: Congest Heart Fail Date: 2009 Nov-Dec