Key result
Three-dimensional echocardiography yielded similar left ventricular mass compared to cine magnetic resonance imaging (149 g vs 148 g, p=0.67), but underestimated end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes.
Why the study?
Is three-dimensional echocardiography as accurate and reproducible as cine magnetic resonance imaging in estimating left ventricular parameters in patients with and without wall motion abnormalities?
Observational (n=83)
Is three-dimensional echocardiography as accurate and reproducible as cine magnetic resonance imaging in estimating left ventricular parameters in patients with and without wall motion abnormalities?
Mean Difference: 1
Absolute Event Rate: 149% vs 148%
p-value: p=0.67
Three-dimensional echocardiography provides accurate and reproducible measurements of left ventricular mass and ejection fraction compared to cardiac MRI, although it systematically underestimates ventricular volumes.
Supports three-dimensional echocardiography for mass assessment; leaves open prospective validation for volumes before routine clinical use.
AIM: To evaluate if three-dimensional echocardiography (3-DE) is as accurate and reproducible as cine magnetic resonance imaging (cMR) in estimating left ventricular (LV) parameters in patients with and without wall motion abnormalities (WMA). METHODS: 83 patients (33 with WMA) underwent 3-DE and cMR. 3-DE datasets were analysed using a semi-automatic contour detection algorithm. The accuracy of 3-DE was tested against cMR in the two groups of patients. All measurements were made twice by two different observers. RESULTS: LV mass by 3-DE was similar to that obtained by cMR (149 (SD 42) g vs 148 (45) g, p = 0.67), with small bias (1 (28) g) and excellent interobserver agreement (-2 (31) g vs 4 (26) g). The two measurements were also highly correlated (r = 0.94), irrespective of WMA. End-diastolic and end-systolic LV volumes and ejection fraction by 3-DE and cMR were highly correlated (r = 0.97, 0.98, 0.94, respectively). Yet, 3-DE underestimated cMR end-diastolic volumes (167 (68) ml vs 187 (70) ml, p<0.001) and end-systolic volumes (88 (56) ml vs 101 (65) ml, p<0.001), but yielded similar ejection fractions (50% (14%) vs 50% (16%), p = 0.23). CONCLUSION: 3-DE permits accurate determination of LV mass and volumes irrespective of the presence or absence of WMA. LV parameters obtained by 3-DE are also as reproducible as those obtained by cMR. This suggests that 3-DE can be used to follow up patients with LV hypertrophy and/or remodelling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Waroux et al. (2007) conducted an observational in Wall motion abnormalities (n=83). Three-dimensional echocardiography (3-DE) vs. Cine magnetic resonance imaging (cMR) was evaluated on Left ventricular mass (MD 1, p=0.67). Three-dimensional echocardiography yielded similar left ventricular mass compared to cine magnetic resonance imaging (149 g vs 148 g, p=0.67), but underestimated end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: