Optimization of left ventricular ejection fraction measurement by two-dimensional echocardiography in patients with repa
- PDF / 87,776 Bytes
- 2 Pages / 595.28 x 793.7 pts Page_size
- 15 Downloads / 212 Views
POSTER PRESENTATION
Open Access
Optimization of left ventricular ejection fraction measurement by two-dimensional echocardiography in patients with repaired tetralogy of Fallot: comparison of geometric methods with cardiovascular magnetic resonance Jimmy C Lu*, Gregory J Ensing, Sunkyung Yu, Thor Thorsson, Janet E Donohue, Adam L Dorfman From 15th Annual SCMR Scientific Sessions Orlando, FL, USA. 2-5 February 2012 Background In patients with repaired tetralogy of Fallot (rTOF), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) predicts adverse clinical outcomes. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is the gold standard for LVEF measurement, but two-dimensional echocardiography (2DE) is commonly used for serial evaluation of LVEF. The optimal 2DE method for LVEF measurement and limiting factors in this population are not known. Methods This single-center retrospective study included all patients with rTOF with CMR performed 2007-2010 without general anesthesia and 2DE within 3 months of CMR, with adequate images for analysis by all 2DE methods. Two investigators blinded to CMR results measured LVEF from 2DE studies by biplane Simpson’s (BiS) method (using apical 4-chamber and apical or parasternal 3-chamber images), 5/6 area*length (AL), and visual estimate. Two investigators blinded to 2DE results measured LVEF from CMR by Simpson’s method, as well as by AL, to test validity of geometric assumptions. An investigator re-evaluated each modality at least one month later.
(table), but with high interobserver variability (median 14.8%). LVEF by AL correlated moderately with CMR, but with higher intraobserver (median 7.1% vs. 2.9%, p=0.004) and interobserver variability (median 11.1% vs. 3.8%, p=0.004) than CMR; LVEF by BiS correlated poorly with CMR. AL method on CMR closely agreed with Simpson’s method on CMR. Relative to CMR, 2DE underestimated both short-axis area (diastolic 19.6±6.0 vs. 25.2±6.9 cm2, p=0.01; systolic 9.8±3.4 vs. 13.3±4.9 cm2, p=0.01) and LV length (diastolic 7.4±0.7 vs. 8.8 ±1.0 cm, p
Data Loading...
