BACKGROUND: Doppler tissue imaging (DTI)-based dyssynchrony parameters failed to predict response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in the multicenter Predictors of Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (PROSPECT) trial. Large variability during the interpretation of DTI data was one of several factors thought to contribute to this failure. In this study, the authors hypothesized that using larger regions of interest (ROIs) to generate velocity curves from Doppler tissue images would significantly reduce the variability of DTI dyssynchrony parameters. METHODS: The variability of 3 ROI sizes (6 x 6, 18 x 6, and 30 x 6 mm) was compared in 30 patients undergoing CRT. Variability due to manual ROI placement was determined for each ROI size by placing 3 ROIs in each myocardial segment, 6mm apart from one another. Thus, 3 velocity curves were generated for each segment and each ROI size. Four published dyssynchrony parameters were calculated from all permutations of the 3 ROI positions per segment. A mean modified coefficient of variation was calculated for each parameter and ROI size. RESULTS: The 6 x 6 mm ROI had a mean coefficient of variation of 27%. The 18 x 6 and 30 x 6 mm ROIs had significantly lower coefficients of variation (17% and 14%, respectively) than the 6 x 6 mm ROI (P < .01 for both). The 30 x 6 mm ROI also reduced the diagnostic inconsistency of dyssynchrony parameters by 44% (P = .024) compared with the 6 x 6 mm ROI. CONCLUSION: Using a 30 x 6 mm ROI instead of a 6 x 6 mm ROI to quantify tissue Doppler dyssynchrony reduces variability by 47% and diagnostic inconsistency by 44%. The authors recommend using a 30 x 6 mm ROI in future trials to minimize variability.
BACKGROUND: Doppler tissue imaging (DTI)-based dyssynchrony parameters failed to predict response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in the multicenter Predictors of Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (PROSPECT) trial. Large variability during the interpretation of DTI data was one of several factors thought to contribute to this failure. In this study, the authors hypothesized that using larger regions of interest (ROIs) to generate velocity curves from Doppler tissue images would significantly reduce the variability of DTI dyssynchrony parameters. METHODS: The variability of 3 ROI sizes (6 x 6, 18 x 6, and 30 x 6 mm) was compared in 30 patients undergoing CRT. Variability due to manual ROI placement was determined for each ROI size by placing 3 ROIs in each myocardial segment, 6mm apart from one another. Thus, 3 velocity curves were generated for each segment and each ROI size. Four published dyssynchrony parameters were calculated from all permutations of the 3 ROI positions per segment. A mean modified coefficient of variation was calculated for each parameter and ROI size. RESULTS: The 6 x 6 mm ROI had a mean coefficient of variation of 27%. The 18 x 6 and 30 x 6 mm ROIs had significantly lower coefficients of variation (17% and 14%, respectively) than the 6 x 6 mm ROI (P < .01 for both). The 30 x 6 mm ROI also reduced the diagnostic inconsistency of dyssynchrony parameters by 44% (P = .024) compared with the 6 x 6 mm ROI. CONCLUSION: Using a 30 x 6 mm ROI instead of a 6 x 6 mm ROI to quantify tissue Doppler dyssynchrony reduces variability by 47% and diagnostic inconsistency by 44%. The authors recommend using a 30 x 6 mm ROI in future trials to minimize variability.
Authors: Jeroen J Bax; Thomas H Marwick; Sander G Molhoek; Gabe B Bleeker; Lieselot van Erven; Eric Boersma; Paul Steendijk; Ernst E van der Wall; Martin J Schalij Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2003-11-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Jeroen J Bax; Sander G Molhoek; Lieselot van Erven; Paul J Voogd; Soeresh Somer; Eric Boersma; Paul Steendijk; Martin J Schalij; Ernst E Van der Wall Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2003-01-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Jan D'hooge; Bart Bijnens; Jan Thoen; Frans Van de Werf; George R Sutherland; Paul Suetens Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Cheuk-Man Yu; Jeffrey Wing-Hong Fung; Qing Zhang; Chi-Kin Chan; Yat-Sun Chan; Hong Lin; Leo C C Kum; Shun-Ling Kong; Yan Zhang; John E Sanderson Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-06-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jeroen J Bax; Gerardo Ansalone; Ole A Breithardt; Genevieve Derumeaux; Christophe Leclercq; Martin J Schalij; Peter Sogaard; Martin St John Sutton; Petros Nihoyannopoulos Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-07-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Dean Notabartolo; John D Merlino; Andrew L Smith; David B DeLurgio; Fernando V Vera; Kirk A Easley; Randolph P Martin; Angel R León Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Gabe B Bleeker; Martin J Schalij; Sander G Molhoek; Harriette F Verwey; Eduard R Holman; Eric Boersma; Paul Steendijk; Ernst E Van Der Wall; Jeroen J Bax Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2004-05
Authors: Mark S Turner; Rob A Bleasdale; Dragos Vinereanu; Catherine E Mumford; Vince Paul; Alan G Fraser; Michael P Frenneaux Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-05-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Hugues Bader; Stephane Garrigue; Stephane Lafitte; Sylvain Reuter; Pierre Jaïs; Michel Haïssaguerre; Jacques Bonnet; Jacques Clementy; Raymond Roudaut Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-01-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Vincent C Thomas; Kristopher M Cumbermack; Carey K Lamphier; Christina R Phillips; Derek A Fyfe; Brandon K Fornwalt Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2012-11-29 Impact factor: 5.251