Key result
CMR-measured LVEF differs significantly from echo and radionuclide ventriculography, showing modalities are not interchangeable.
Why the study?
It is important to know whether left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction results by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography, and cardiovascular magnetic resonance are interchangeable in heart failure patients.
Are left ventricular ejection fraction and volume measurements by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography, and cardiovascular magnetic resonance interchangeable in patients with chronic stable heart failure?
Cross-Sectional (n=52)
Blinded
Yes
Are left ventricular ejection fraction and volume measurements by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography, and cardiovascular magnetic resonance interchangeable in patients with chronic stable heart failure?
p-value: p=<0.001
Ejection fraction and volume measurements by different imaging techniques are not interchangeable in heart failure patients, with CMR preferred due to superior image quality and 3D approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
LVEF requires modality context in stable HF; leaves open standardization of cutoffs for therapy and trials.
Nick G. Bellenger (2000) conducted a cross-sectional in chronic stable heart failure (n=52). Cardiovascular magnetic resonance vs. Echocardiography and radionuclide ventriculography was evaluated on Left ventricular ejection fraction (p=<0.001). Mean ejection fraction by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (30%) significantly differed from radionuclide ventriculography (24%) and M-mode echo (39%), showing they are not interchangeable.