Key result
An integrated 2D/3D dobutamine stress echocardiography protocol was technically feasible and provided superior image quality for left ventricular segments compared to either modality alone.
Why the study?
Does an integrated 2D/3D stress echocardiography protocol improve image quality compared to 2D or 3D imaging alone in patients referred for stress echocardiography?
Observational (n=25)
Does an integrated 2D/3D stress echocardiography protocol improve image quality compared to 2D or 3D imaging alone in patients referred for stress echocardiography?
An integrated 2D/3D approach to dobutamine stress echocardiography is technically feasible and provides superior image quality compared to either modality alone.
May support integrated 2D/3D stress echocardiography protocols; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional (3D) stress echocardiography is a relatively new technique offering the potential to acquire images of the entire left ventricle from 1 or 2 transducer positions in a time-efficient manner. Relative to two-dimensional (2D) imaging, the ability to quickly acquire full volume images during peak stress with 3D echocardiography can eliminate left ventricular (LV) foreshortening while reducing inter-operator variability. Our objectives were to (1) determine the practicality of a novel integrated 2D/3D stress protocol in incorporating 3D imaging into a standard 2D stress echocardiogram and (2) to determine whether the quality of imaging using the novel 2D/3D protocol was sufficient for interpretation. METHODS: Twenty-five patients referred for stress echocardiography underwent an integrated 2D/3D image acquisition protocol. LV segments were scored from 0 (absent or no clear endocardial visualization) to 3 (excellent/full visualization of endocardial border) with each modality. 2D segment quality scoring was compared with 3D. An integrated score was compared with either 2D or 3D imaging alone. RESULTS: Two-dimensional and 3D imaging were optimal for differing segments and the integrated protocol was superior to either modality alone. 3D imaging was superior in visualizing the anterior and anterolateral region of the base segments, compared to 2D imaging. 3D imaging was less useful for the base, the mid-inferior, and the inferoseptal segments, thus emphasizing the need to retain 2D imaging in stress echocardiography at this time. CONCLUSION: The integrated 2D/3D protocol approach to stress echocardiography is technically feasible and maximizes image quality of dobutamine stress echocardiography, improving patient assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Johri et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Referred for stress echocardiography (n=25). Integrated 2D/3D stress echocardiography protocol vs. 2D or 3D imaging alone was evaluated on Left ventricular segment image quality score (0 to 3). An integrated 2D/3D dobutamine stress echocardiography protocol was technically feasible and provided superior image quality for left ventricular segments compared to either modality alone.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: