The novel 4D AutoLVQ software showed excellent correlation with 4D TomTec for left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction (r=0.97-0.99, P<0.0001) and halved analysis time.
Observational (n=103)
Does 4D AutoLVQ software provide accurate and rapid quantitation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction compared to 4D TomTec and CMR in patients undergoing 3D echocardiography?
The novel 4D AutoLVQ software provides rapid and accurate quantitation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction, halving analysis time compared to existing software while maintaining similar accuracy against CMR.
Estimación del efecto: r = 0.98 for EDV, 0.99 for ESV, 0.97 for EF
valor p: p=<0.0001
AIMS: To assess the accuracy and reproducibility of a novel automated software for left ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (EF) measurements using real-time three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 103 patients with a wide range of LV volumes were analyzed with both 4D AutoLVQ and 4D TomTec software. In 23 patients, a side-by-side comparison of LV volume and EF measurements was done between 3DE, 2DE, and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Excellent correlation was found between 4D AutoLVQ and 4D TomTec r = 0.98 for end-diastolic volume (EDV), 0.99 for end-systolic volume (ESV), and 0.97 for EF, P < 0.0001, with small biases and narrow limits of agreement: EDV 5.2 mL (-14 to 25 mL), ESV 2.9 mL (-10 to 16 mL), EF -0.2% (-7 to 6%). Time of analysis was halved using 4D AutoLVQ with manual correction (1 min 52 s+/- 30 s) in comparison with 4D TomTec software (3 min 46 s +/- 1 min 24 s). Both softwares showed similar accuracy in comparison with CMR (4D AutoLVQ biases -11.0 mL, -9.1 mL, and 2.9%; 4D TomTec biases -8.3 mL, -7.4 mL, and 2.8% for EDV, ESV, and EF, respectively, P = NS for all) and good reproducibility. CONCLUSION: Novel 4D AutoLVQ software showed very good agreement with more time-consuming 4D TomTec software, having similar accuracy against CMR.
Muraru et al. (Thu,) conducted a observational in Patients with a wide range of left ventricular volumes (n=103). 4D AutoLVQ software vs. 4D TomTec software and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was evaluated on Correlation of left ventricular volumes (EDV, ESV) and ejection fraction (EF) between 4D AutoLVQ and 4D TomTec (r = 0.98 for EDV, 0.99 for ESV, 0.97 for EF, p=<0.0001). The novel 4D AutoLVQ software showed excellent correlation with 4D TomTec for left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction (r=0.97-0.99, P<0.0001) and halved analysis time.