The use of a fixed external reference system is not superior to other methods for analyzing regional left ventricular wall motion due to potential biases from translational components.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Do not prioritize fixed reference systems for regional wall motion analysis; leaves open optimal method selection in future studies.
To investigate whether a fixed external reference system should be used to most accurately describe regional left ventricular wall motion, we used vectors to analyze a simple model of ventricular contraction. If measured in a fixed external reference system, motion of implanted radiopaque midwall markers may contain translational as well as contractile components. Therefore, comparisons of different reference systems that use marker motion measured in a fixed reference system as a standard will be biased unless proper corrections are included. We conclude that evidence to data does not indicate that the use of a fixed reference system is superior to other methods for analyzing regional ventricular wall motion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Clayton et al. (1982) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: