Key result
An ellipsoid model using transthoracic echocardiography distance measurements provided good estimates of right ventricular stroke volumes, but significantly underestimated RV volumes compared to CMR.
Why the study?
Can right ventricular volume be accurately determined by combining TTE distance measurements compared to CMR?
Observational (n=12)
Can right ventricular volume be accurately determined by combining TTE distance measurements compared to CMR?
An ellipsoid model using TTE distance measurements provides good estimates of RV stroke volumes, but absolute volumes cannot be used interchangeably with CMR.
Ellipsoid TTE model may estimate RV stroke volume but not absolute volumes interchangeably with CMR; leaves open validation before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND: The position of the right ventricle (RV), often partly behind the sternum, implies difficulties to image the RV free wall using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and consequently limits the possibilities of stroke volume calculations. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the volume of the right ventricle (RV) can be determined by combining TTE distance measurements that do not need the RV free wall to be fully visualized. METHODS: The RV volume was approximated by an ellipsoid composed of three distances. Distance measurements, modeled RV stroke volumes (RVSV), and RV ejection fraction (RVEF) were compared to reference values obtained from cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging for 12 healthy volunteers. RESULTS: Inter-modality comparisons showed that distance measurements were significantly underestimated in TTE compared to CMR. The modeled RV volumes using TTE distance measurements were underestimated compared to reference CMR volumes. There was, however, for TTE an agreement between modeled RVSV and left ventricular stroke volumes determined by biplane Simpson's rule. Similar agreement was shown between modeled RVSV based on CMR distance measurements and the CMR reference. Regarding RVEF, further studies including patients with a wider range of RVEF are needed to evaluate the method. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the ellipsoid model of the RV provides good estimates of RVSVs, but volumes based on distance measurements from different modalities cannot be used interchangeably.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jorstig et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Healthy volunteers (n=12). Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) distance measurements vs. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging was evaluated on Right ventricular volume, stroke volume, and ejection fraction. An ellipsoid model using transthoracic echocardiography distance measurements provided good estimates of right ventricular stroke volumes, but significantly underestimated RV volumes compared to CMR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: