Key result
Visual quantitative estimation of ejection fraction demonstrated a significantly stronger correlation with radioventriculography than standard visual estimation (r=0.969 vs r=0.896, P<0.01).
Why the study?
Does visual quantitative estimation (VQE) improve the accuracy of ejection fraction determination compared to visual estimation when referenced to radioventriculography?
Observational
Does visual quantitative estimation (VQE) improve the accuracy of ejection fraction determination compared to visual estimation when referenced to radioventriculography?
Visual quantitative estimation (VQE) using a 12-segment model provides highly correlated estimates of ejection fraction with radioventriculography, outperforming standard visual estimation.
VQE may improve EF accuracy versus standard visual estimation; leaves open whether it alters management or outcomes in practice.
Ejection fraction (EF) is the most commonly used parameter of left ventricular (LV) systolic function and can be assessed by echocardiography. Quantitative echocardiography is time consuming and is as accurate as visual estimation, which has significant variability. We hypothesized that each echocardiographer has developed a mental set of guidelines that relate to how much individual segment shortening constitutes normal function or hypokinesis of varying extents. We determined the accuracy of applying these guidelines to an accepted technique of EF determination using a retrospective analysis of consecutive two-dimensional echocardiographic studies performed on patients who had radioventriculography (RVG) within 48 hours. Using a 12 segment model, we scored each segment at the base and mid-ventricular level based on segmental excursion and thickening. The apex was scored similarly but with 1/3 of the value based on a cylinder-cone model. EF was determined from the sum of segment scores and was estimated visually. We termed this approach visual quantitative estimation (VQE). We correlated the EF derived from VQE and visual estimation with RVG EF. In the training set, VQE demonstrated a strong correlation with RVG (r = 0.969), which was significantly greater than visual estimation (r = 0.896, P < 0.01). The limits of agreement for VQE (+12% to -7%) were similar to the limits of RVG agreement with contrast ventriculography (+10% to -11%) with similar intraobserver and interobserver variabilities. Similar correlation was noted in the prediction set between VQE and RVG EF (r = 0.967, P < 0.001). We conclude that VQE provides highly correlated estimates of EF with RVG.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lavine et al. (2003) conducted an observational in Patients undergoing echocardiography and radioventriculography. Visual quantitative estimation (VQE) vs. Visual estimation was evaluated on Correlation of ejection fraction derived from VQE and visual estimation with RVG (r = 0.969, p=<0.01). Visual quantitative estimation of ejection fraction demonstrated a significantly stronger correlation with radioventriculography than standard visual estimation (r=0.969 vs r=0.896, P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: