Subjective visual echocardiographic estimate of left ventricular ejection fraction as an alternative to conventional echocardiographic methods: comparison with contrast angiography

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_09192820A886
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Subjective visual echocardiographic estimate of left ventricular ejection fraction as an alternative to conventional echocardiographic methods: comparison with contrast angiography
Journal
Clinical Cardiology
Author(s)
Mueller  X., Stauffer  J. C., Jaussi  A., Goy  J. J., Kappenberger  L.
ISSN
0160-9289 (Print)
Publication state
Published
Issued date
11/1991
Volume
14
Number
11
Pages
898-902
Notes
Clinical Trial
Controlled Clinical Trial
Journal Article --- Old month value: Nov
Abstract
Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is a measure of ventricular function with clinical and prognostic significance and can be reliably calculated with various M-mode and two-dimensional echocardiographic formulas in selected, good quality echocardiograms. Subjective visual echocardiographic estimate of LVEF is a potentially less time consuming and more widely applicable method. In order to test its reliability, we performed a prospective blind trial in 40 consecutive patients undergoing biplane contrast ventriculography (BCV), to compare the visual estimate of LVEF during a complete echocardiogram of three independent observers with (1) cubed M-mode formula, (2) Teichholz M-mode formula, (3) length-area method from the four-chamber view, and (4) Simpson's single plane formula. BCV was the reference method. The best correlation with BCV was obtained by visual estimate [r of the three observers, respectively = 0.75; 0.84; 0.81] and M-mode measurements [r (1) = 0.8; r (2) = 0.8], but the most sophisticated methods provided the poorest estimate [r (3) = 0.54; r (4) = 0.49]. All correlation coefficients improved when good studies, defined as a definition of the endocardial surface of more than 75%, were selected (n = 23), but the differences persisted. One observer systematically estimated higher values than the other two (Friedman's test, p less than 0.01) and this interobserver variability suggests that each echocardiographer should test himself against BCV in his lab in order to apply the visual estimate method reliably.
Keywords
Adult Aged Coronary Angiography/standards Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted/standards Echocardiography/*methods/standards Evaluation Studies Female Heart Diseases/*diagnosis/epidemiology/physiopathology Humans Male Middle Aged *Observer Variation Prospective Studies Radionuclide Ventriculography/*standards Reproducibility of Results *Stroke Volume
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
28/01/2008 12:53
Last modification date
20/08/2019 13:31
Usage data