Assessment of Left Ventricular Volumes with Echocardiography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Real-Life Evaluation of Standard versus New Semiautomatic Methods

被引:39
|
作者
Aurich, Matthias [1 ]
Andre, Florian [1 ]
Keller, Marius [1 ]
Greiner, Sebastian [1 ]
Hess, Alexander [1 ]
Buss, Sebastian J. [1 ]
Katus, Hugo A. [1 ]
Mereles, Derliz [1 ]
机构
[1] Heidelberg Univ, Dept Internal Med 3, Heidelberg, Germany
关键词
Volumetry; Ejection fraction; Systolic function; TIME 3-DIMENSIONAL ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; AUTOMATED BORDER-DETECTION; EJECTION FRACTION; MYOCARDIAL-INFARCTION; EUROPEAN-SOCIETY; HEART-FAILURE; RECOMMENDATIONS; QUANTIFICATION; QUANTITATION; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.echo.2014.07.006
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Routine quantitative assessment of left ventricular (LV) volumes with echocardiography is hindered by time-consuming methods requiring a manual trace of the LV cavity from two apical two-dimensional planes. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate faster new semiautomatic echocardiographic methods that could represent a feasible alternative for the assessment of LV volumes and ejection fraction (EF) in clinical practice. Methods: Two semiautomatic methods, the automated EF (Auto-EF) for two-dimensional echocardiography and the 4D Auto LVQ tool for three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE), were compared with the biplane modified Simpson's method and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in 47 patients. To evaluate the accuracy of volumetry, additional in vitro measurements using water-filled latex balloons were performed with both modalities. Results: Results of balloon volumetry by echocardiography and CMR measurements were in good agreement with real balloon volumes. The mean LV EF was 45 +/- 11% by Auto-EF, 45 +/- 11% by 3DE, 48 +/- 11% by Simpson's method, and 54 +/- 12% by CMR. Linear regression and Bland-Altman analyses showed good associations for semiautomatic methods with Simpson's method (Auto-EF, r = 0.85, bias = 3%, limits of agreement [LOA] = 12%; 3DE, r = 0.79, bias = 3%, LOA = 14%), as well as with CMR (Auto-EF, r = 0.74, bias = 9%, LOA = 17%; 3DE, r = 0.73, bias = 9%, LOA = 17%). Intra-and interobserver variability were 6% and 12% with Auto-EF and 8% and 11% with 3DE, respectively. Conclusions: Good correlations between semiautomatic echocardiographic parameters for assessment of LV volumes and EF could be observed when compared with Simpson's method or CMR. However, intertechnique agreement analysis of absolute LV volumes revealed considerable differences, with significant underestimation of volumes and EF with respect to CMR.
引用
收藏
页码:1017 / 1024
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Comparison of Echocardiography, Cardiac Magnetic Resonance, and Computed Tomographic Imaging for the Evaluation of Left Ventricular Myocardial Function: Part 2 (Diastolic and Regional Assessment)
    Menhel Kinno
    Prashant Nagpal
    Stephen Horgan
    Alfonso H. Waller
    Current Cardiology Reports, 2017, 19
  • [42] Comparison of Echocardiography, Cardiac Magnetic Resonance, and Computed Tomographic Imaging for the Evaluation of Left Ventricular Myocardial Function: Part 2 (Diastolic and Regional Assessment)
    Kinno, Menhel
    Nagpal, Prashant
    Horgan, Stephen
    Waller, Alfonso H.
    CURRENT CARDIOLOGY REPORTS, 2017, 19 (01)
  • [43] Semi-automated endocardial border tracking for left ventricular volumes by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography: comparison to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging
    Chukwu, E. O.
    Gopal, A. S.
    Freidman, M. L.
    Iwuchukwu, C. J.
    Toole, R. S.
    Schapiro, W.
    Reichek, N.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2006, 27 : 563 - 563
  • [44] Measurement of left ventricular volumes by 3-dimensional echocardiography with tissue harmonic imaging: A comparison with magnetic resonance imaging
    Kim, WY
    Sogaard, P
    Kristensen, BO
    Egeblad, H
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, 2001, 14 (03) : 169 - 179
  • [45] Fully Automated Assessment of Left Ventricular Volumes and Mass from Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Images
    Marino, M.
    Veronesi, F.
    Corsi, C.
    2014 36TH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE IEEE ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY SOCIETY (EMBC), 2014, : 1079 - 1082
  • [46] Left ventricular sphericity: comparison of three-dimensional echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging
    Patel, A. A.
    Onuora, A. A.
    Toole, R. S.
    Goldman, M.
    Alexander, D.
    Gupta, D.
    Kadiyala, M.
    Cao, J.
    Reichek, N.
    Gopal, A. S.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2008, 29 : 883 - 883
  • [47] Echocardiography vs Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis of Left Ventricular Thrombus: A Systematic Review
    Roifman, Idan
    Connelly, Kim A.
    Wright, Graham A.
    Wijeysundera, Harindra C.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2015, 31 (06) : 785 - 791
  • [48] Magnetic resonance real-time imaging for the evaluation of left ventricular function
    Nagel, E
    Schneider, U
    Schalla, S
    Ibrahim, T
    Schnackenburg, B
    Bornstedt, A
    Klein, C
    Lehmkuhl, HB
    Fleck, E
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE, 2000, 2 (01) : 7 - 14
  • [49] Evaluation of Cardiac Left Ventricular Mass from Tagged Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Makram, Abram W.
    Khalifa, Ayman M.
    El-Wakad, Mohamed T.
    El-Rewaidy, Hossam
    Fahmy, Ahmed S.
    Ibrahim, El-Sayed H.
    2014 CAIRO INTERNATIONAL BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING CONFERENCE (CIBEC), 2014, : 67 - 70
  • [50] COMPARISON OF LEFT VENTRICULAR VOLUMES AND EJECTION FRACTION VALUES BETWEEN ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY AND CARDIAC MAGNETIC RESONANCE: A PILOT STUDY
    Zydzik, Lukasz
    Dadanski, Emil
    Tyjas, Kinga
    Wojciechowska, Wiktoria
    Chyrchel, Bernadeta
    Popiela, Tadeusz
    Rajzer, Marek
    JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 2024, 42