AIMS: Two-dimensional echocardiographic (2DE) assessment of right ventricular (RV) function is difficult, often resulting in inconsistent RV evaluation. Real-time three-dimensional echocardiography (RT3DE) allows the RV to be viewed in multiple planes, which can potentially improve RV assessment and limit interobserver variability when compared with 2DE. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five patients underwent 2DE and RT3DE. Views of 2DE (RV inflow, RV short axis, and apical four-chamber) were compared with RT3DE views by four readers. RT3DE data sets were sliced from anterior-posterior (apical view) and from base to apex (short axis) to obtain six standardized planes. Readers recorded the RV ejection fraction (RVEF) from 2DE and RT3DE images. RVEF recorded by RT3DE (RVEF(3D)) and 2D (RVEF(2D)) were compared with RVEF by disc summation (RVEF(DS)), which was used as a reference. Interobserver variability among readers of RVEF(3D) and RVEF(2D) was then compared. Overall, mean RVEF(DS), RVEF(3D), and RVEF(2D) were 37 +/- 11%, 38 +/- 10%, 41 +/- 10%, respectively. The mean difference of RVEF(3D)-RVEF(DS) was significantly less than RVEF(2D)-RVEF(DS) (3.7 +/- 4% vs. 7.1 +/- 5%, P = 0.0066, F-test). RVEF(3D) correlated better with RVEF(DS) (r = 0.875 vs. r = 0.69, P = 0.028, t-test). RVEF(3D) was associated with a 39% decrease in interobserver variability when compared with RVEF(2D) [standard deviation of mean difference: 3.7 vs. 5.1, (RT3DE vs. 2DE), P = 0.018, t-test]. CONCLUSIONS: RT3DE provides improved accuracy of RV function assessment and decreases interobserver variability when compared with 2D views.
AIMS: Two-dimensional echocardiographic (2DE) assessment of right ventricular (RV) function is difficult, often resulting in inconsistent RV evaluation. Real-time three-dimensional echocardiography (RT3DE) allows the RV to be viewed in multiple planes, which can potentially improve RV assessment and limit interobserver variability when compared with 2DE. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five patients underwent 2DE and RT3DE. Views of 2DE (RV inflow, RV short axis, and apical four-chamber) were compared with RT3DE views by four readers. RT3DE data sets were sliced from anterior-posterior (apical view) and from base to apex (short axis) to obtain six standardized planes. Readers recorded the RV ejection fraction (RVEF) from 2DE and RT3DE images. RVEF recorded by RT3DE (RVEF(3D)) and 2D (RVEF(2D)) were compared with RVEF by disc summation (RVEF(DS)), which was used as a reference. Interobserver variability among readers of RVEF(3D) and RVEF(2D) was then compared. Overall, mean RVEF(DS), RVEF(3D), and RVEF(2D) were 37 +/- 11%, 38 +/- 10%, 41 +/- 10%, respectively. The mean difference of RVEF(3D)-RVEF(DS) was significantly less than RVEF(2D)-RVEF(DS) (3.7 +/- 4% vs. 7.1 +/- 5%, P = 0.0066, F-test). RVEF(3D) correlated better with RVEF(DS) (r = 0.875 vs. r = 0.69, P = 0.028, t-test). RVEF(3D) was associated with a 39% decrease in interobserver variability when compared with RVEF(2D) [standard deviation of mean difference: 3.7 vs. 5.1, (RT3DE vs. 2DE), P = 0.018, t-test]. CONCLUSIONS: RT3DE provides improved accuracy of RV function assessment and decreases interobserver variability when compared with 2D views.
Authors: Alexander van Straten; Hubert W Vliegen; Mark G Hazekamp; Jeroen J Bax; Paul H Schoof; Jaap Ottenkamp; Ernst E van der Wall; Albert de Roos Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: M D Cheitlin; J S Alpert; W F Armstrong; G P Aurigemma; G A Beller; F Z Bierman; T W Davidson; J L Davis; P S Douglas; L D Gillam Journal: Circulation Date: 1997-03-18 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Aasha S Gopal; Ebere O Chukwu; Chizor J Iwuchukwu; Alan S Katz; Rena S Toole; William Schapiro; Nathaniel Reichek Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 5.251