Two-dimensional echocardiography correlated well with cardiac magnetic resonance for left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction, but overestimated LVEF and underestimated LV volumes.
Observational
Do two-dimensional echocardiographic methods (5/6 AL and modified biplane Simpson) accurately quantify left ventricular volume and ejection fraction compared to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in children?
Children 18 years of age and younger. Excluded: patients with congenital heart disease, >3 months between modalities, and changes in medication regimen between corresponding CMR and echocardiograms.
Two-dimensional echocardiography using five-sixth area-length (5/6 AL) and modified biplane Simpson (BS) methods
Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging
Left ventricular (LV) volume and ejection fraction (EF)surrogate
While echocardiography is a good surrogate for estimating LVEF in children, it systematically overestimates LVEF and underestimates LV volumes compared to CMR, suggesting CMR should be used when accurate measurements are needed for critical decisions.
Background: Echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular (LV) volume and ejection fraction (EF) is widely used in the pediatric population. However, there is no consensus on the most accurate method of quantifying ventricular volumes and systolic function. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare two commonly used echocardiographic methods for the evaluation of LV volume and quantification of EF, the five-sixth area-length (5/6 AL) and the modified biplane Simpson (BS), to cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in children. Methods: CMR studies were paired with echocardiograms and retrospectively analyzed in children 18 years of age and younger. Studies performed more than 3 months between modalities, patients with congenital heart disease, and patients who had changes in medication regimen between corresponding CMR and echocardiograms were excluded. LV volumes and EF were calculated using the 5/6 AL and BS methods and compared to volumes and EF measured on corresponding CMR studies. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on LV function, pathology, and weight. Results: = 0.82). However, both echocardiographic methods overestimated LVEF and underestimated LV volumes when compared to CMR. Conclusion: Left ventricular volumes and EF, as measured by echocardiography, correlate well with CMR measurements. Echocardiography underestimates LV systolic and diastolic volumes and overestimates LVEF. While echocardiography is a good surrogate for estimating LVEF, CMR should be considered in patients for whom accurate measurements are needed for critical clinical decision-making.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Suneet Bhansali
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Ella Tokar
NYU Langone Health
Sunil Saharan
NYU Langone Health
Annals of Pediatric Cardiology
NYU Langone Health
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Bhansali et al. (Mon,) conducted a observational in Pediatric patients requiring left ventricular function and volume evaluation. Two-dimensional echocardiography (5/6 area-length and modified biplane Simpson) vs. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging was evaluated on Left ventricular volume and ejection fraction. Two-dimensional echocardiography correlated well with cardiac magnetic resonance for left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction, but overestimated LVEF and underestimated LV volumes.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a189a3084137bd80e918abc — DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/apc.apc_199_23