Key result
Harmonic imaging yielded higher inter-institutional agreement in interpreting dobutamine stress echocardiograms compared to fundamental imaging (mean kappa 0.55 vs 0.49; P<0.01).
Why the study?
Does harmonic imaging with standardized criteria improve inter-institutional agreement in interpreting dobutamine stress echocardiograms compared to fundamental imaging in patients with suspected CAD?
Population
150 patients with suspected coronary artery disease.
Comparison
Dobutamine stress echocardiogram using harmonic… vs Dobutamine stress echocardiogram using…
Design
Cross-sectional, Readers blinded to clinical data and other institutions'…
Authors
Loading...
May support harmonic imaging for higher stress echo agreement; leaves open effects on accuracy and outcomes.
Cross-Sectional (n=150)
Blinded to clinical data
Yes
Does harmonic imaging with standardized criteria improve inter-institutional agreement in interpreting dobutamine stress echocardiograms compared to fundamental imaging in patients with suspected CAD?
Effect estimate: mean kappa 0.55 (95% CI 0.50-0.60)
p-value: p=<0.01
The use of harmonic imaging combined with standardized digital processing and reading criteria significantly improves inter-institutional agreement in the interpretation of dobutamine stress echocardiograms.
Rainer Hoffmann (2002) conducted a cross-sectional in Suspected coronary artery disease (n=150). Harmonic imaging vs. Fundamental imaging was evaluated on Inter-institutional agreement on dobutamine stress echocardiogram results (mean kappa 0.55, 95% CI 0.50-0.60, p=<0.01). Harmonic imaging yielded higher inter-institutional agreement in interpreting dobutamine stress echocardiograms compared to fundamental imaging (mean kappa 0.55 vs 0.49; P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: