Why the study?
Does real-time three-dimensional echocardiography accurately quantify left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction compared to cardiac magnetic resonance in heart failure patients?
Does real-time three-dimensional echocardiography accurately quantify left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction compared to cardiac magnetic resonance in heart failure patients?
RT3DE is accurate for evaluating LVEF in heart failure patients compared to CMR, but significantly underestimates LV volumes, especially in severe LV dilatation.
RT3DE EF assessment may be used in HF; leaves open volume quantification in severe dilatation pending further validation.
BACKGROUND: Accurate quantification of left ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (EF) is of critical importance. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is considered as the reference and three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) is an accurate method, but only few data are available in heart failure patients. We therefore sought to compare the accuracy of real time three-dimensional echocardiography (RT3DE) and two-dimensional echocardiography (2DE) for quantification of LV volumes and EF, relative to CMR imaging in an unselected population of heart failure patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 24 patients (17 men, age 58 ± 15 years) with history of heart failure who underwent echocardiographic assessment of LV function (2DE, RT3DE) and CMR within a period of 24 hours. Mean LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) was 208 ± 109 mL (121 ± 64 mL/m(2) ) and mean LVEF was 31 ± 12.8%. 3DE data sets correlate well with CMR, particularly with respect to the EF (r: 0.8, 0.86, and 0.95; P < 0.0001 for LVEDV, LVESV, and EF, respectively) with small biases (-55 mL, -44 mL, 1.1%) and acceptable limits of agreement. RT3DE provides more accurate measurements of LVEF than 2DE (z= 2.1, P = 0.037) and lower variability. However, 3DE-derived LV volumes are significantly underestimated in patients with severe LV dilatation. In patients with LVEDV below 120 mL/m(2) , RT3DE is more accurate for volumes and EF evaluation. CONCLUSION: Compared with CMR, RT3DE is accurate for evaluation of EF and feasible in all our heart failure patients, at the expense of a significant underestimation of LV volumes, particularly when LVEDV is above 120 mL/m(2) .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moceri et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: