MethodPerformance of Conventional Echocardiographic Parameters and Myocardial Measurements in the Sequential Evaluation of Left Ventricular Function
Section snippets
Clinical evaluation
We studied 346 consecutive patients referred for sequential 2-dimensional echocardiography at a major tertiary hospital from November 2001 to January 2006. Patients were categorized as either stable or unstable according to clinical progress. This differentiation was made to investigate any potential influence of clinical status on measurement variability. These reviews were performed by a single physician blinded to sequential echocardiographic measurements and based on a comprehensive review
Patient characteristics
Of 346 patients (age 61 ± 15 years; 56% men) undergoing sequential echocardiography (692 studies), 144 (42%) were classified as clinically stable, and 202 (58%), as unstable. Mean time between studies was 305 ± 239 days, and stable patients had significantly longer follow-up times compared with unstable patients (p <0.001). Overall mean LVEF was significantly lower in unstable patients compared with clinically stable patients (p <0.001), as was tissue Em velocity (p <0.01). Overall population
Discussion
Newer measurements of LV function, such as tissue Em, LA area, and E/Em ratio, have been used in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of LV function.5, 6, 7 However, this study of their incorporation into the clinical echocardiographic laboratory indicated they are subject to significant levels of variability when used to monitor patient LV function in a sequential fashion. Disappointingly, they appeared no more robust, and possibly worse, than the more conventional measurement of LVEF in
References (29)
- et al.
Importance of imaging method over imaging modality in noninvasive determination of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction: assessment by two- and three-dimensional echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2000) - et al.
Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography’s Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Chamber Quantification Writing Group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
(2005) - et al.
Peak early diastolic mitral annulus velocity by tissue Doppler imaging adds independent and incremental prognostic value
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2003) - et al.
Noninvasive estimation of left ventricular filling pressure by E/e’ is a powerful predictor of survival after acute myocardial infarction
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2004) - et al.
Testing the test: the reliability of echocardiography in the sequential assessment of valvular regurgitation
Am Heart J
(2002) - et al.
Should echocardiography be performed to assess effects of antihypertensive therapy?Test-retest reliability of echocardiography for measurement of left ventricular mass and function
J Am Coll Cardiol
(1995) - et al.
The search for intelligent quantitation in echocardiography: “eyeball,” “trackball” and beyond
J Am Coll Cardiol
(1993) - et al.
Reproducibility of pulsed wave tissue Doppler echocardiography
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
(1999) - et al.
Which Doppler parameters are load independent?A study in normal volunteers after blood donation
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
(2005) - et al.
Left atrial volume as a morphophysiologic expression of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and relation to cardiovascular risk burden
Am J Cardiol
(2002)
M-Mode echocardiographic predictors of six- to seven-year incidence of coronary heart disease, stroke, congestive heart failure, and mortality in an elderly cohort (the Cardiovascular Health Study)
Am J Cardiol
Use of real-time three-dimensional echocardiography to measure left atrial volume: comparison with other echocardiographic techniques
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
Left atrial size: renewed interest in an old echocardiographic measurement
Am Heart J
ACCF/ASE/ACEP/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2007 Appropriateness criteria for transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group, American Society of Echocardiography, American College of Emergency Physicians, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Endorsed by the American College of Chest Physicians and the Society of Critical Care Medicine
J Am Coll Cardiol
Cited by (39)
Echocardiographic changes following active heat acclimation
2020, Journal of Thermal BiologyLeft Ventricular Recovery in Young Patients With Myocardial Infarction: How Much Is Enough?
2020, Journal of the American College of CardiologyRecovery of Left Ventricular Systolic Function and Clinical Outcomes in Young Adults With Myocardial Infarction
2020, Journal of the American College of CardiologyCitation Excerpt :There are also inherent limitations regarding the assessment of EF when using echocardiography. For instance, visual estimation of EF may vary by interpreter or by institution (34), with a coefficient of variation for left ventricular systolic function as high as 15% (35). However, echocardiography, compared with other imaging modalities, has been shown to provide an accurate estimation of EF and is widely used in clinical research (36–38).
Diagnostic and prognostic utility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction - Implications for clinical trials
2018, Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic ResonanceSetting global standards in adult echocardiography: Where are we?
2015, Indian Heart JournalCitation Excerpt :These variations are often large enough to be of clinical relevance. For example, a previous study had demonstrated significant variability in several measures of LV systolic function and the large magnitude of these variations had led the investigators to conclude that caution was warranted during sequential assessment of LV systolic function.14 These issues are even more pertinent during day-to-day performance of echocardiography because the imaging protocols are not as standardized as they are in the core laboratories or experienced research laboratories from where most of the data on the accuracy of various echocardiographic measurements has been derived.
Novel plasma and imaging biomarkers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction
2015, IJC Heart and VasculatureCitation Excerpt :On the other hand, non-invasive measures of DD are within normal range in up to a third of subjects. These factors highlighted above therefore ensure that existing and newer markers described in this article do not wholly fulfill the aforementioned biomarker criteria [10–16]. Various pathophysiological derangements have been implicated in HFPEF (see Table 1).