Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Accuracy of fully automated right ventricular quantification software with 3D echocardiography: direct comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance and semi-automated quantification software.
Otani, Kyoko; Nabeshima, Yosuke; Kitano, Tetsuji; Takeuchi, Masaaki.
Afiliação
  • Otani K; Department of Laboratory and Transfusion Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health Hospital, Iseigaoka, Yahatanishi-ku, Kitakyushu 807-8556, Japan.
  • Nabeshima Y; Second Department of Internal Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Medicine, Iseigaoka, Yahatanishi-ku, Kitakyushu 807-8555, Japan.
  • Kitano T; Second Department of Internal Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Medicine, Iseigaoka, Yahatanishi-ku, Kitakyushu 807-8555, Japan.
  • Takeuchi M; Department of Laboratory and Transfusion Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health Hospital, Iseigaoka, Yahatanishi-ku, Kitakyushu 807-8556, Japan.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging ; 21(7): 787-795, 2020 07 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31549722
ABSTRACT

AIMS:

The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy and reproducibility of a novel, fully automated 3D echocardiography (3DE) right ventricular (RV) quantification software compared with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and semi-automated 3DE RV quantification software. METHODS AND

RESULTS:

RV volumes and the RV ejection fraction (RVEF) were measured using a fully automated software (Philips), a semi-automated software (TomTec), and CMR in 100 patients who had undergone both CMR and 3DE examinations on the same day. The feasibility of the fully automated software was 91%. Although the fully automated software, without any manual editing, significantly underestimated RV end-diastolic volume (bias -12.6 mL, P < 0.001) and stroke volume (-5.1 mL, P < 0.001) compared with CMR, there were good correlations between the two modalities (r = 0.82 and 0.78). No significant differences in RVEF between the fully automated software and CMR were observed, and there was a fair correlation (r = 0.72). The RVEF determined by the semi-automated software was significantly larger than that by CMR or the fully automated software (P < 0.001). The fully automated software had a shorter analysis time compared with the semi-automated software (15 s vs. 120 s, P < 0.001) and had a good reproducibility.

CONCLUSION:

A novel, fully automated 3DE RV quantification software underestimated RV volumes but successfully approximated RVEF when compared with CMR. No inferiority of this software was observed when compared with the semi-automated software. Rapid analysis and higher reproducibility also support the routine adoption of this method in the daily clinical workflow.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ecocardiografia Tridimensional Tipo de estudo: Guideline Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ecocardiografia Tridimensional Tipo de estudo: Guideline Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article