Key result
M-mode echocardiography overestimates LV mass by ~15% compared to 3D echocardiography.
Why the study?
The accuracy of left ventricular mass measurement by M-mode echocardiography compared with three-dimensional echocardiography in patients with normal LV shape was uncertain.
Does M-mode echocardiography overestimate left ventricular mass compared to 3D echocardiography in patients with normal LV shape?
Observational (n=86)
Does M-mode echocardiography overestimate left ventricular mass compared to 3D echocardiography in patients with normal LV shape?
Effect estimate: mean overestimation 15%
p-value: p=<0.001
M-mode echocardiography systematically overestimates left ventricular mass compared to 3D echocardiography, highlighting the need for technique-specific partition values to accurately detect LV hypertrophy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Caution advised with M-mode LVM; supports technique-specific hypertrophy thresholds but leaves validation open.
H Kühl (2003) conducted an observational in Hypertension or aortic stenosis (n=86). M-mode echocardiography vs. Three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography was evaluated on Left ventricular mass (LVM) (mean overestimation 15%, p=<0.001). M-mode echocardiography systematically overestimated left ventricular mass by a mean of 15% compared with 3D echocardiography (p<0.001), despite a high correlation between the techniques.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: