Why the study?
Does the automated contour tracking (ACT) method accurately measure left ventricular ejection fraction compared to left ventriculography in patients with high-quality echocardiographic images?
Does the automated contour tracking (ACT) method accurately measure left ventricular ejection fraction compared to left ventriculography in patients with high-quality echocardiographic images?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The automated contour tracking method provides a reliable, noninvasive estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction that correlates highly with invasive left ventriculography.
The automated contour tracking (ACT) method has been developed for the automated measurement of area volume using the energy minimization method without tracing a region of interest. The purpose of this study was to compare the ACT method and left ventriculography (LVG) for the measurement of left ventricular (LV) function in the clinical setting. An apical four-chamber view was visualized by two-dimensional echocardiography and recorded for off-line analysis in 14 patients with high-quality images who underwent LVG. The ACT method automatically traces the endocardial border from the recorded images and calculates LV volumes (end-diastole and end-systole) and ejection fraction (EF). Both ACT and LVG were compared by linear regression analysis for the measurement of EF. EF determined by the ACT method agreed well with that by LVG (r = 0.96, y = 0.94x + 4.6, standard error of the estimate = 3.9%). The mean difference between the ACT and LVG was -1.4%+/- 7.3%. In conclusion, the ACT method is reliable for noninvasive estimation of EF in high-quality images. This suggests that this new technique may be useful in the automated quantification of LV function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sugioka et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: