May 30, 2007Echocardiography
A Comparison between QLAB and TomTec Full Volume Reconstruction for Real Time Three‐Dimensional Echocardiographic Quantification of Left Ventricular Volumes
Why the study?
Does QLAB compared to TomTec provide accurate left ventricular volume and ejection fraction quantification by real-time 3D echocardiography in patients with cardiomyopathy?
Population
41 patients in sinus rhythm with a cardiomyopathy and adequate 2D image quality
Comparison
Off-line left ventricular volume analysis with… vs TomTec 4D LV analysis V2.0 and magnetic…
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
EF reliable across platforms in cardiomyopathy; leaves open software-specific volume validation before serial use.
Structured PICO
Does QLAB compared to TomTec provide accurate left ventricular volume and ejection fraction quantification by real-time 3D echocardiography in patients with cardiomyopathy?
P
Population
41 patients (mean age 56 +/- 11 years, 28 men) in sinus rhythm with a cardiomyopathy and adequate 2D image quality
I
Intervention
Off-line left ventricular (LV) volume analysis with QLAB V4.2 (semiautomated border detection with biplane projections)
C
Comparator
TomTec 4D LV analysis V2.0 (primarily manual tracking with triplane projections and semiautomated border detection) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as reference standard
O
Outcome
Interobserver variability and accuracy of left ventricular volumes (LV-EDV, LV-ESV) and ejection fraction (LV-EF)surrogate
Both QLAB and TomTec software provide accurate LV-EF assessment by real-time 3D echocardiography in cardiomyopathy patients, though QLAB underestimates LV volumes more than TomTec.
Cite This Study
Soliman et al. (2007) studied this question.