Key result
Novel 2D echo matches 3D echo accuracy for LVM quantification while improving reproducibility.
Why the study?
Increased left ventricular mass predicts adverse cardiovascular events, but conventional echocardiographic methods for monitoring it have poor reproducibility and accuracy.
Does a novel 2D echocardiographic method improve the reproducibility and accuracy of left ventricular mass quantification compared to conventional methods in subjects with and without cardiac disorders?
Cohort (n=85)
No
Does a novel 2D echocardiographic method improve the reproducibility and accuracy of left ventricular mass quantification compared to conventional methods in subjects with and without cardiac disorders?
Absolute Event Rate: 2% vs 2%
A novel 2D echocardiographic method for left ventricular mass quantification offers better reproducibility and comparable accuracy to 3D echocardiography, allowing easy integration into standard protocols.
May facilitate LV mass assessment in routine echocardiography; leaves open outcome validation in prospective studies.
Purpose Increased left ventricular mass (LVM) is a strong independent predictor for adverse cardiovascular events, but conventional echocardiographic methods used to assess and monitor individuals are limited by poor reproducibility and accuracy. We aimed to develop an echocardiographic method for LVM-quantification that is simple, reproducible and accurate. Methods The novel method adds the mean wall thickness to the left ventricular end-diastolic volume acquired using the biplane model of discs. The mean wall thickness is acquired from the parasternal short axis view. Cardiac assessment was performed using echocardiography followed immediately by cardiac magnetic resonance in 85 subjects with different left ventricular geometries, ranging from patients with various cardiac disorders (n=41) to individuals without known cardiac disorders (n=44). We compared the novel two-dimensional (2D) method to various conventional one-dimensional (1D) and 2D methods as well as three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography. Results The novel method had better reproducibility in intra-examiner (coefficients of variation (CV) 9% vs. 11-14%) and inter-examiner analysis (CV 9% vs. 10-20%) than the other methods. Accuracy of the novel method was similar to 3D (mean difference±95% limits of agreement, CV): Novel: 2±50g,15% vs. 3D: 2±51g, 16%; and better than the 1D-method by Devereux (7±76g, 23%). Conclusion The novel 2D-based method for LVM-quantification had better reproducibility than the other echocardiographic methods. Accuracy was similar to 3D and better than conventional methods. As endocardial tracings using the biplane model forms part of the standard echocardiographic protocol, the novel method can easily be integrated into any echocardiographic software, without substantially increasing analysis time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kristensen et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Various cardiac disorders and normal left ventricular geometries (n=85). Novel 2D echocardiographic method for LVM quantification vs. 3D echocardiography and conventional 1D/2D methods was evaluated on Accuracy of LVM quantification compared to CMR (mean bias in grams). The novel 2D echocardiographic method for left ventricular mass quantification demonstrated accuracy similar to 3D echocardiography (bias 2g) and better reproducibility (intra-examiner CV 9%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: