Key result
Three-dimensional echocardiography demonstrated excellent correlation with cineventriculography for left ventricular volume (end-diastole r=0.97; end-systole r=0.98) with half the variability of 2D.
Why the study?
Does three-dimensional echocardiography improve the accuracy of left ventricular volume measurement compared to two-dimensional echocardiography when referenced to cineventriculography in patients?
Cross-Sectional (n=35)
Does three-dimensional echocardiography improve the accuracy of left ventricular volume measurement compared to two-dimensional echocardiography when referenced to cineventriculography in patients?
Three-dimensional echocardiography is superior to two-dimensional echocardiography for measuring left ventricular volumes, showing excellent correlation with cineventriculography and half the variability.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports 3D echocardiography for LV volumetry; leaves open effects on outcomes before changing practice.
Objectives. We compared two- and three-dimensional echocardiopaphy with cineventriculography for measurement of left ventricular volume in patients. Background. Three-dimensional echocardiography has been shown to be highly accurate and superior to two-dimensional echocardiography in measuring left ventricular volume in vitro. However, there has been little comparison of the two methods in patients. Methods. Two- and three-dimensional echocardiography were performed in 35 patients (mean age 48 years) 1 to 3 h before left ventricular cineventriculography. Three-dimensional echocardiography used an acoustic spatial locator to register image position. Volume was computed using a polyhedral surface reconstruction algorithm based on multiple nonparallel, unevenly spaced short-axis cross sections. Two-dimensional echocardiography used the apical biplane summation of disks method. Single-plane cineventriculographic volumes were calculated using the summation of disks algorithm. The methods were compared by linear regression and a limits of agreement analysis. For the latter, systematic error was assessed by the mean of the deferences (cineventriculography minus echocardiography), and the limits of agreement were defined as ±2 SD from the mean difference. Results. Three-dimensional echocardiographic volumes demonstrated excellent correlation (end-diastole r = 0.97; end-systole r = 0.98) with cineventriculography. Standard errors of the estimate were approximately half those of two-dimensional echocardiography (end-diastole ±11.0 ml vs. ±21.5 ml; end-systole ±10.2 ml vs. ±17.0 ml). By limits of agreement analysis the end-diastolic mean diferences for two- and three-dimensional echocardiography were 21.1 and 12.9 ml, respectively. The limits of agreement (±2 SD) were ±54.0 and ±24.8 ml, respectively. For end-systole, comparable improvement was obtained by three-dimensional echocardiography. Results for ejection fraction by the two methods were similar. Conclusions. Three-dimensional echocardiography correlates highly with cineventriculography for estimation of ventricular volumes in patients and has approximately half the variability of two-dimensional echocardiography for these measurements. On the basis of this study, three-dimensional echocardiography is the preferred echocardiographic technique for measurement of ventricular volume. Three-dimensional echocardiography is equivalent to two-dimensional echocardiography for measuring ejection fraction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sapin et al. (1994) conducted a cross-sectional in Patients requiring left ventricular volume measurement (n=35). Three-dimensional echocardiography vs. Two-dimensional echocardiography and cineventriculography was evaluated on Left ventricular volume measurement correlation with cineventriculography (r = 0.97 (end-diastole); r = 0.98 (end-systole)). Three-dimensional echocardiography demonstrated excellent correlation with cineventriculography for left ventricular volume (end-diastole r=0.97; end-systole r=0.98) with half the variability of 2D.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: