BACKGROUND: Three dimensional echo is a relatively new technique which may offer a rapid alternative for the examination of the right heart. However its role in patients with non-standard ventricular size or anatomy is unclear. This study compared volumetric measurements of the right ventricle in 25 patients with adult congenital heart disease using both cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and three dimensional echocardiography. METHODS: Patients were grouped by diagnosis into those expected to have normal or near-normal RV size (patients with repaired coarctation of the aorta) and patients expected to have moderate or worse RV enlargement (patients with repaired tetralogy of Fallot or transposition of the great arteries). Right ventricular end diastolic volume, end systolic volume and ejection fraction were compared using both methods with CMR regarded as the reference standard RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis of the 25 patients demonstrated that for both RV EDV and RV ESV, there was a significant and systematic under-estimation of volume by 3D echo compared to CMR. This bias led to a mean underestimation of RV EDV by -34% (95%CI: -91% to + 23%). The degree of underestimation was more marked for RV ESV with a bias of -42% (95%CI: -117% to + 32%). There was also a tendency to overestimate RV EF by 3D echo with a bias of approximately 13% (95% CI -52% to +27%). CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant and clinically meaningful differences in volumetric measurements were observed between the two techniques. Three dimensional echocardiography does not appear ready for routine clinical use in RV assessment in congenital heart disease patients with more than mild RV dilatation at the current time.
BACKGROUND: Three dimensional echo is a relatively new technique which may offer a rapid alternative for the examination of the right heart. However its role in patients with non-standard ventricular size or anatomy is unclear. This study compared volumetric measurements of the right ventricle in 25 patients with adult congenital heart disease using both cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and three dimensional echocardiography. METHODS:Patients were grouped by diagnosis into those expected to have normal or near-normal RV size (patients with repaired coarctation of the aorta) and patients expected to have moderate or worse RV enlargement (patients with repaired tetralogy of Fallot or transposition of the great arteries). Right ventricular end diastolic volume, end systolic volume and ejection fraction were compared using both methods with CMR regarded as the reference standard RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis of the 25 patients demonstrated that for both RV EDV and RV ESV, there was a significant and systematic under-estimation of volume by 3D echo compared to CMR. This bias led to a mean underestimation of RV EDV by -34% (95%CI: -91% to + 23%). The degree of underestimation was more marked for RV ESV with a bias of -42% (95%CI: -117% to + 32%). There was also a tendency to overestimate RV EF by 3D echo with a bias of approximately 13% (95% CI -52% to +27%). CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant and clinically meaningful differences in volumetric measurements were observed between the two techniques. Three dimensional echocardiography does not appear ready for routine clinical use in RV assessment in congenital heart diseasepatients with more than mild RV dilatation at the current time.
Authors: Darryl Miller; Michel G Farah; Anna Liner; Keith Fox; Mark Schluchter; Brian D Hoit Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Tal Geva; Bryan M Sandweiss; Kimberlee Gauvreau; James E Lock; Andrew J Powell Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-03-17 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: H Joachim Nesser; Wolfgang Tkalec; Ayan R Patel; Navroz D Masani; J Niel; Bernhard Markt; Natesa G Pandian Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: Victor Mor-Avi; Carly Jenkins; Harald P Kühl; Hans-Joachim Nesser; Thomas Marwick; Andreas Franke; Christian Ebner; Benjamin H Freed; Regina Steringer-Mascherbauer; Heidi Pollard; Lynn Weinert; Johannes Niel; Lissa Sugeng; Roberto M Lang Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2008-07
Authors: N B Schiller; P M Shah; M Crawford; A DeMaria; R Devereux; H Feigenbaum; H Gutgesell; N Reichek; D Sahn; I Schnittger Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 1989 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Rachel M Wald; Erik Lyseggen; Erwin N Oechslin; Gary D Webb; Candice K Silversides Journal: Congenit Heart Dis Date: 2009 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.007
Authors: Nee Scze Khoo; Alistair Young; Chris Occleshaw; Brett Cowan; Irene S L Zeng; Thomas L Gentles Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2009-10-07 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Dudley J Pennell; A John Baksi; John Paul Carpenter; David N Firmin; Philip J Kilner; Raad H Mohiaddin; Sanjay K Prasad Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-09-04 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Ralph L Widya; Rutger W van der Meer; Johannes W A Smit; Luuk J Rijzewijk; Michaela Diamant; Jeroen J Bax; Albert de Roos; Hildo J Lamb Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-11-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Dudley J Pennell; John Paul Carpenter; David N Firmin; Philip J Kilner; Raad H Mohiaddin; Sanjay K Prasad Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2012-11-18 Impact factor: 5.364