Literature DB >> 23768466

Comparison of three-dimensional echocardiographic findings to those of magnetic resonance imaging for determination of left ventricular mass in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy.

Kenya Kusunose1, Deborah H Kwon, Hirohiko Motoki, Scott D Flamm, Thomas H Marwick.   

Abstract

The standard echocardiographic evaluation of left ventricular (LV) mass, particularly in ischemic cardiomyopathy (IC) is challenging because it is based on geometric assumptions. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of LV mass calculation using echocardiographic modalities compared with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in IC and in nonischemic cardiomyopathy (non-IC). Echocardiography was performed in 104 patients (mean age 55 ± 15 years) referred for CMR: 63 with IC and 41 with non-IC. CMR, M-mode echocardiography, 2-dimensional echocardiography, and 3-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) were analyzed using standard commercial tools to obtain LV mass. LV mass on 3DE showed a higher correlation with CMR than 2-dimensional echocardiography (r = 0.87 vs r = 0.70, p <0.001). M-mode echocardiography overestimated LV mass (bias +30%) and 2-dimensional echocardiography underestimated LV mass (bias -11%), whereas measurements on 3DE showed only minimal bias (-2%). LV mass on 3DE in non-IC showed a significantly higher correlation with CMR than in IC (r = 0.92 vs r = 0.84, z = 2.3, p <0.05). In non-IC, the mean difference was -2 g (-1% of the mean), with 95% limits of agreement of ±33 g (±19% of the mean). In IC, the mean difference was -7 g (-4% of the mean), with limits of agreement of ±56 g (±31% of the mean). There was a correlation between the absolute LV mass differences (3DE derived and CMR derived) and scar percentage (infarcted mass/total LV mass) using delayed-hyperenhancement images (r = 0.40, p <0.05). The net reclassification index with 3DE was +16% for concentric LV hypertrophy. In conclusion, the most accurate and reliable echocardiographic measurement of LV mass is 3DE, but underestimation and variability remain challenges in IC.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23768466     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.04.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  9 in total

1.  Three-dimensional echocardiography of the athlete's heart: a comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Ruben De Bosscher; Mathias Claeys; Christophe Dausin; Kaatje Goetschalckx; Piet Claus; Lieven Herbots; Olivier Ghekiere; Caroline Van De Heyning; Bernard P Paelinck; Kristel Janssens; Leah Wright; Michael Darragh Flannery; André La Gerche; Rik Willems; Hein Heidbuchel; Jan Bogaert; Guido Claessen
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 2.316

2.  A new method to quantify left ventricular mass by 2D echocardiography.

Authors:  Charlotte Burup Kristensen; Katrine Aagaard Myhr; Frederik Fasth Grund; Niels Vejlstrup; Christian Hassager; Raj Mattu; Rasmus Mogelvang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 4.996

3.  Evaluation of Right Ventricular Myocardial Mechanics by 2- and 3-Dimensional Speckle-Tracking Echocardiography in Patients With an Ischemic or Non-ischemic Etiology of End-Stage Heart Failure.

Authors:  Fangyan Tian; Ying Gu; Yanting Zhang; Bei Zhang; Yuji Xie; Shaomei Yu; Shuangshuang Zhu; Wei Sun; Shan Cheng; Mingzu Qian; Yixia Lin; Wenqian Wu; Yali Yang; Qing Lv; Jing Wang; Li Zhang; Yuman Li; Mingxing Xie
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-05-25

4.  Echocardiographic Left Ventricular Mass Estimation: Two-Dimensional Area-Length Method is Superior to M-Mode Linear Method in Swine Models of Cardiac Diseases.

Authors:  Satoshi Miyashita; Nadjib Hammoudi; Shin Watanabe; Olympia Bikou; Kelly Yamada; Jaume Aguero; Koichi Nomoto; Taro Kariya; Kenneth Fish; Roger J Hajjar; Kiyotake Ishikawa
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 5.  Multimodality Imaging for Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Severity Grading: A Methodological Review.

Authors:  Maaike Alkema; Ernest Spitzer; Osama I I Soliman; Christian Loewe
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2016-12-28

Review 6.  The emerging role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in the evaluation of hypertensive heart disease.

Authors:  Sophie Mavrogeni; Vasiliki Katsi; Vasiliki Vartela; Michel Noutsias; George Markousis-Mavrogenis; Genovefa Kolovou; Athanasios Manolis
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 2.298

7.  Prognostic value of novel imaging parameters derived from standard cardiovascular magnetic resonance in high risk patients with systemic light chain amyloidosis.

Authors:  Nisha Arenja; Florian Andre; Johannes H Riffel; Fabian Aus dem Siepen; Ute Hegenbart; Stefan Schönland; Arnt V Kristen; Hugo A Katus; Sebastian J Buss
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 5.364

8.  Predictors of Mortality in Patients With Severe Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Undergoing Surgical Mitral Valve Intervention.

Authors:  Kenya Kusunose; Nancy A Obuchowski; Marc Gillinov; Zoran B Popovic; Scott D Flamm; Brian P Griffin; Deborah H Kwon
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 5.501

9.  The Female Athlete's Heart: Comparison of Cardiac Changes Induced by Different Types of Exercise Training Using 3D Echocardiography.

Authors:  Alexandra Doronina; István Ferenc Édes; Adrienn Ujvári; Zoltán Kántor; Bálint Károly Lakatos; Márton Tokodi; Nóra Sydó; Orsolya Kiss; Alexey Abramov; Attila Kovács; Béla Merkely
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-05-28       Impact factor: 3.411

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.