Key result
Quantitative wall-motion analysis using ∆3DFS detected critical stenoses with 88% sensitivity and 100% specificity, performing similarly to area strain.
Why the study?
Does 3D fractional shortening from 3D dobutamine stress echocardiography effectively detect critical coronary stenoses compared to sonomicrometry strain in an open-chest dog model?
Does 3D fractional shortening from 3D dobutamine stress echocardiography effectively detect critical coronary stenoses compared to sonomicrometry strain in an open-chest dog model?
Quantitative wall-motion analysis using 3D fractional shortening during dobutamine stress echocardiography is as effective as 3D strain for detecting critical coronary stenoses in a preclinical model.
BACKGROUND: Quantitative analysis of wall motion from three-dimensional (3D) dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) could provide additional diagnostic information not available from qualitative analysis. In this study, we compare the effectiveness of 3D fractional shortening (3DFS), a measure of wall motion computed from 3D echocardiography (3DE), to strain and strain rate measured with sonomicrometry for detecting critical stenoses during DSE. METHODS: Eleven open-chest dogs underwent DSE both with and without a critical stenosis. 3DFS was measured from 3DE images acquired at peak stress. 3DFS was normalized by subtracting average 3DFS during control peak stress (∆3DFS). Strains in the perfusion defect (PD) were measured from sonomicrometry, and PD size and location were measured with microspheres. RESULTS: A ∆3DFS abnormality indicated the presence of a critical stenosis with high sensitivity and specificity (88% and 100%, respectively), and ∆3DFS abnormality size correlated with PD size (R(2) = 0.54). The sensitivity and specificity for ∆3DFS were similar to that for area strain (88%, 100%) and circumferential strain and strain rate (88%, 92% and 88%, 86%, respectively), while longitudinal strain and strain rate were less specific. ∆3DFS correlated significantly with both coronary flow reserve (R(2) = 0.71) and PD size (R(2) = 0.97), while area strain correlated with PD size only (R(2) = 0.67), and other measures were not significantly correlated with flow reserve or PD size. CONCLUSION: Quantitative wall-motion analysis using ∆3DFS is effective for detecting critical stenoses during DSE, performing similar to 3D strain, and provides potentially useful information on the size and location of a perfusion defect.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Parker et al. (2014) studied Coronary stenosis (n=11). 3D fractional shortening (∆3DFS) from 3D dobutamine stress echocardiography vs. Strain and strain rate measured with sonomicrometry was evaluated on Detection of critical stenoses (sensitivity and specificity). Quantitative wall-motion analysis using ∆3DFS detected critical stenoses with 88% sensitivity and 100% specificity, performing similarly to area strain.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: