Key result
TomTec 2D-STE software yielded persistently lower values for all assessed fetal strain and dyssynchrony variables compared to Philips QLab, indicating the vendors cannot be used interchangeably.
Why the study?
The study aimed to compare Philips and TomTec 2D-STE software measurements of strain and dyssynchrony in healthy fetuses.
Do strain and dyssynchrony measurements in healthy fetuses differ when using Philips versus TomTec 2D speckle tracking echocardiography software?
Observational (n=93)
Do strain and dyssynchrony measurements in healthy fetuses differ when using Philips versus TomTec 2D speckle tracking echocardiography software?
Fetal 2D speckle tracking echocardiography measurements of strain and dyssynchrony are highly vendor-dependent and cannot be used interchangeably between Philips and TomTec software.
Requires vendor-specific fetal strain references; leaves open whether standardization can reconcile inter-software differences.
Background The aim of this study was to compare Philips and TomTec two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) software measurements of strain and dyssynchrony values in healthy fetuses. Methods This was an explorative observational study in which the echocardiographic data of 93 healthy fetuses between the 20th and 38th week of gestation were determined from a four-chamber view using 2D speckle tracking. The global and segmental longitudinal strain values of both ventricles, inter-ventricular and left intra-ventricular dyssynchrony were analyzed using QLab version 10.8 (Philips Medical Systems, Andover, MA, USA) and TomTec-Arena version 2.30 (TomTec, Unterschleißheim, Germany). Results TomTec showed persistently lower values for all of the assessed strain and dyssynchrony variables. For all variables, the bias between vendors tended to increase with gestational age, though not to a significant extent. Left ventricular dyssynchrony and longitudinal strain within the mid segment of the septum correlated best between vendors; however, the limits of agreement were wide in both cases. None of the variables assessed in the two-chamber view compared well between QLAB and TomTec. Conclusion Speckle tracking software cannot be used interchangeably between vendors. Further investigations are necessary to standardize fetal 2D-STE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Köster et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Healthy fetuses (n=93). Philips QLab 2D-STE software vs. TomTec-Arena 2D-STE software was evaluated on Global and segmental longitudinal strain values and dyssynchrony. TomTec 2D-STE software yielded persistently lower values for all assessed fetal strain and dyssynchrony variables compared to Philips QLab, indicating the vendors cannot be used interchangeably.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: