May 1, 2008Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine
How many patients would be misclassified using M-mode and two-dimensional estimates of left atrial size instead of left atrial volume? A three-dimensional echocardiographic study
Why the study?
Do M-mode and 2D echocardiographic estimates of left atrial size accurately reflect 3D left atrial volume in patients undergoing routine echocardiography?
Population
104 patients presenting for a routine echocardiographic evaluation, mean age 62 +/- 15 years, 55% male.
Comparison
M-mode and two-dimensional echocardiographic… vs Three-dimensional echocardiographic measured…
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Avoid M-mode or area-based LA measures due to misclassification risk; supports 2D volumes as alternatives but leaves outcome impact open.
Structured PICO
Do M-mode and 2D echocardiographic estimates of left atrial size accurately reflect 3D left atrial volume in patients undergoing routine echocardiography?
P
Population
104 patients presenting for a routine echocardiographic evaluation, mean age 62 +/- 15 years, 55% male.
I
Intervention
M-mode and two-dimensional (2D) echocardiographic estimates of left atrial size (diameters, area, and volume)
C
Comparator
Three-dimensional (3D) echocardiographic measured left atrial volume (LAV) as a reference standard
O
Outcome
Correlation between M-mode/2D parameters and 3D LAV, and misclassification rate of left atrial dilatationsurrogate
M-mode diameters and 2D area measurements poorly predict 3D left atrial volume and frequently misclassify LA dilatation, whereas 2D volume measurements (single-plane or biplane) are accurate alternatives.
Cite This Study
Badano et al. (2008) studied this question.