Why the study?
The authors sought to assess the left atrial-left ventricular long axis angulation as a new measure of left atrial remodeling, evaluate its predictors, and assess its effect on two-dimensional left atrial volume estimation.
Does adjusting 2D left atrial volume calculations based on the left atrial-left ventricular angle improve accuracy compared to 3D volumetric methods in patients undergoing cardiac imaging?
Does adjusting 2D left atrial volume calculations based on the left atrial-left ventricular angle improve accuracy compared to 3D volumetric methods in patients undergoing cardiac imaging?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The LA-LV angle is a novel measure of cardiac remodeling predicted by LV size, function, and mitral regurgitation, and adjusting 2D area-length formulas based on this angle improves correlation with 3D left atrial volume measurements.
We assessed the left atrial-left ventricular (LA-LV) long axis angulation value as a new measure of LA remodeling, and studied its predictors, its effect on two-dimensional LA volume (2D LAVol) estimation, and optimization techniques for 2D LAVol values. Retrospective electrocardiogram-gated coronary computed tomographic angiograms of 164 consecutive patients were reviewed. The LA-LV angle was measured in reconstructed 3-chamber views, and its predictors were determined. The LAVol measured by the area-length method after image optimization along the LV long axis (AL) and the LA long axis (AC-AL), was compared with that measured by the three-dimensional (3D)-volumetric method. LAVol calculation was modified to minimize differences from the 3D values. LA-LV angles ranged from 0° to 63°. In the univariate analysis, decreasing angulation was significantly associated with increasing LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), mitral regurgitation grade, LV and LA anteroposterior dimensions, and decreasing LV ejection fraction (LVEF). On multivariate analysis, increasing LVEDV, MR, and LA anteroposterior dimension inversely correlated with angulation; LVEF was positively correlated. The AL and 3D methods significantly differed only for patients with angles ≤ 29.9°. Conversely, LAVol was overestimated for all angules by AC-AL. Modification of AL LAVol using a regression equation, or by substituting the shortest with the longest and average LA lengths in patients with angles ≤ 29.9° and 30-39.9°, respectively neutralized the difference. The LA-LV angle is a new measure of LA and LV remodeling predicted by LV size and function, MR, and LA-anteroposterior dimension. AL formula modifications based on angulation in LV-optimized views better correlate with the 3D method than LA-view modification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Al‐Mohaissen et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: