Literature DB >> 7641365

Assessment of cardiac function by three-dimensional echocardiography compared with conventional noninvasive methods.

A S Gopal1, Z Shen, P M Sapin, A M Keller, M J Schnellbaecher, D W Leibowitz, O O Akinboboye, R A Rodney, D K Blood, D L King.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reliable, serial, noninvasive quantitative estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction is essential for selecting and timing therapeutic interventions in patients with heart disease. Equilibrium radionuclide angiography is widely used for this purpose but has well-recognized limitations. Advantages of echocardiography over equilibrium radionuclide angiography include assessment of wall motion, valvular pathology, and cardiac hemodynamics, in addition to portability, lack of radiation exposure, and substantially lower cost. However, conventional echocardiographic techniques are limited by geometric assumptions, image positioning errors, and use of subjective visual methods. To overcome these limitations, a three-dimensional echocardiographic method was developed. This study compares ejection fraction by three-dimensional echocardiography, quantitative two-dimensional echocardiography, and subjective two-dimensional echocardiographic visual estimation with that by equilibrium radionuclide angiography. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Fifty-one unselected patients with suspected heart disease underwent left ventricular ejection fraction determination by equilibrium radionuclide angiography and three-dimensional echocardiography using an interactive line-of-intersection display and a new algorithm, ventricular surface reconstruction, for volume computation. In 44 patients, ejection fractions were also estimated visually by experienced observers from two-dimensional echocardiography and by quantitative two-dimensional echocardiography using an apical biplane summation-of-disks algorithm. An excellent correlation was obtained between three-dimensional echocardiography and equilibrium radionuclide angiography (r = .94 to .97, SEE = 3.64% to 5.35%; limits of agreement, 10.3% to 13.3%) without significant underestimation or overestimation. SEE values and limits of agreement were twofold to threefold lower than corresponding values for all two-dimensional echocardiographic techniques. In addition, interobserver variability was significantly lower for the three-dimensional echocardiographic method (10.2%) than for the apical biplane summation-of-disks method (26.1%) and subjective visual estimation (33.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: Determination of ejection fraction by three-dimensional echocardiography yields results comparable to those obtained by equilibrium radionuclide angiography and is substantially superior to all two-dimensional echocardiographic methods. Therefore, three-dimensional echocardiography may be used for accurate serial quantification of left ventricular function as an alternative to equilibrium radionuclide angiography.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7641365     DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.92.4.842

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  31 in total

1.  Comparison of radionuclide angiography with three echocardiographic parameters of left ventricular function in patients after myocardial infarction.

Authors:  A W van 't Hof; C W Schipper; J G Gerritsen; S Reiffers; J C Hoorntje
Journal:  Int J Card Imaging       Date:  1998-12

2.  Extraction of the two-dimensional cardiothoracic ratio from digital PA chest radiographs: correlation with cardiac function and the traditional cardiothoracic ratio.

Authors:  Ronan F J Browne; Geraldine O'Reilly; David McInerney
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 3.  Endoventricular electromechanical mapping-the diagnostic and therapeutic utility of the NOGA XP Cardiac Navigation System.

Authors:  Peter J Psaltis; Stephen G Worthley
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2008-12-10       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 4.  Continuous and less invasive central hemodynamic monitoring by blood pressure waveform analysis.

Authors:  Ramakrishna Mukkamala; Da Xu
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2010-07-09       Impact factor: 4.733

Review 5.  Echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular systolic function: from ejection fraction to torsion.

Authors:  Matteo Cameli; Sergio Mondillo; Marco Solari; Francesca Maria Righini; Valentina Andrei; Carla Contaldi; Eugenia De Marco; Michele Di Mauro; Roberta Esposito; Sabina Gallina; Roberta Montisci; Andrea Rossi; Maurizio Galderisi; Stefano Nistri; Eustachio Agricola; Donato Mele
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.214

Review 6.  Cardiomyopathy associated with cancer therapy.

Authors:  Anthony F Yu; Richard M Steingart; Valentin Fuster
Journal:  J Card Fail       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 5.712

7.  3D Echo-Based Patient-Specific Computational Left Ventricle Models to Quantify Material Properties and Stress/Strain Differences between Ventricles with and without Infarct.

Authors:  Rui Fan; Dalin Tang; Jing Yao; Chun Yang; Di Xu
Journal:  Comput Model Eng Sci       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.593

Review 8.  Quantitative assessment of left ventricular systolic function using 3-dimensional echocardiography.

Authors:  Rahul Mehrotra; R Alagesan; Sameer Srivastava
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2013-09-23

9.  Prospective comparison of echocardiography versus cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with Ebstein's anomaly.

Authors:  Christine H Attenhofer Jost; Whitney D Edmister; Paul R Julsrud; Joseph A Dearani; M Savas Tepe; Carole A Warnes; Christopher G Scott; Nandan S Anavekar; Naser M Ammash; Heidi M Connolly
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2011-08-06       Impact factor: 2.357

10.  Semi-automated quantification of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography.

Authors:  Jøger Hansegård; Stig Urheim; Ketil Lunde; Siri Malm; Stein Inge Rabben
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2009-04-20       Impact factor: 2.062

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.