Key result
The Vivio handheld platform accurately measured ejection fraction with no mean difference from CMR (-0.2%, P=0.68) and provided 85.7% sensitivity for detecting cardiac dysfunction.
Why the study?
Does a novel handheld mHealth platform accurately assess left ventricular ejection fraction compared to CMR in anthracycline-exposed childhood cancer survivors?
Cross-Sectional (n=191)
Does a novel handheld mHealth platform accurately assess left ventricular ejection fraction compared to CMR in anthracycline-exposed childhood cancer survivors?
A novel handheld mHealth platform accurately assesses left ventricular ejection fraction and detects cardiac dysfunction with higher sensitivity than standard 2D echocardiography when compared to CMR in childhood cancer survivors.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May improve EF screening sensitivity in anthracycline survivors; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
Purpose: Childhood cancer survivors are at risk for anthracycline-related cardiac dysfunction, often developing at a time when they are least engaged in long-term survivorship care. New paradigms in survivorship care and chronic disease screening are needed in this population. We compared the accuracy of a novel handheld mHealth platform (Vivio) as well as echocardiography for assessment of cardiac function [left ventricular ejection fraction (EF)] in childhood cancer survivors with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging (reference). Experimental Design: Cross-sectional study design was used. Concurrent evaluation of EF was performed using Vivio, two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography, and CMR. Differences in mean EF (2D echocardiography vs. CMR; Vivio vs. CMR) were compared using Bland–Altman plots. Linear regression was used to evaluate proportional bias. Results: A total of 191 consecutive survivors participated [50.7% female; median time from diagnosis: 15.8 years (2–44); median anthracycline dose: 225 mg/m2 (25–642)]. Echocardiography overestimated mean EF by 4.9% (P < 0.001); linear regression analysis confirmed a proportional bias, when compared with CMR (t = 3.1, P < 0.001). There was no difference between mean EF derived from Vivio and from CMR (–0.2%, P = 0.68). The detection of cardiac dysfunction via echocardiography was poor when compared with CMR [Echo EF < 45% (sensitivity 14.3%), Echo EF < 50% (sensitivity 28.6%)]. Sensitivity was substantially better for Vivio-based measurements [EF < 45% or EF < 50% (sensitivity 85.7%)]. Conclusions: This accessible technology has the potential to change the day-to-day practice of clinicians caring for the large number of patients diagnosed with cardiac dysfunction and heart failure each year, allowing real-time monitoring and management of their disease without the lag-time between imaging and interpretation of results. Clin Cancer Res; 24(13); 3119–25.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Armenian et al. (2018) conducted a cross-sectional in Anthracycline-related cardiac dysfunction (n=191). Vivio handheld mHealth platform vs. 2D echocardiography and Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was evaluated on Difference in mean left ventricular ejection fraction compared to CMR (MD -0.2%, p=0.68). The Vivio handheld platform accurately measured ejection fraction with no mean difference from CMR (-0.2%, P=0.68) and provided 85.7% sensitivity for detecting cardiac dysfunction.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: