PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 1, 1979Circulation246 citationsOpen Access

Quantitative left ventricular wall motion analysis: a comparison of area, chord and radial methods.

View Full Paper
HGHarris J. GelbergBBBruce H. BrundageSGS A Glantz

Key Points

  • The aim is to establish a simple technique for routine clinical use in analyzing left ventricular wall motion.
  • Compared three methods: area, chord, and radial techniques using ventriculograms.

Structured PICO

Does the area method improve the detection and quantification of left ventricular wall motion abnormalities compared to chord and radial methods?

P
Population
34 patients undergoing ventriculography, comprising 17 with qualitatively normal left ventricular (LV) wall motion (control group) and 17 with at least one region of severe, qualitative wall motion abnormality.
I
Intervention
Area method for quantitative left ventricular regional wall motion analysis.
C
Comparator
Chord and radial methods for quantitative left ventricular regional wall motion analysis.
O
Outcome
Percentage of qualitatively abnormal regions not detected by each method (failure rate) and separation of measured normal and abnormal regions' ejection changes.surrogate

The area method is superior to chord and radial methods for the quantitative analysis of left ventricular wall motion abnormalities on ventriculograms.

Abstract

We were interested in divising a relatively simple quantitative technique that could be used on a routine clinical basis for wall motion analysis. Three quantitative methods of left ventricular (LV) regional analysis were compared in the 30 degrees right anterior oblique and 60 degrees left anterior oblique projection. The control group consisted of 17 patients with qualitatively normal LV wall motion; the abnormal group comprised 17 patients with at least one region of severe, qualitative wall motion abnormality. Normal regional values were determined for area, chord and radial methods by applying the techniques to the ventriculograms of the control group. Each technique was then applied to the abnormal group's ventriculograms to determine the percentage of qualitatively abnormal regions not detected by each method. The area method had the lowest failure rate (p less than 0.001) and the best separation of measured normal and abnormal regions' ejection changes (p less than 0.001), and best reflected symmetric uniform motion of the ventricular silhouette. We conclude that the area method, of the techniques examined, was best for the quantitative analysis of LV wall motion abnormalities.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gelberg et al. (1979) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1b80590ac30a8853919b1ahttps://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.59.5.991
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper